£2m 'Boris bike' scheme could be scuppered by 'anti-cycling sentiment' in the New Forest

A cyclist in the New Forest

A cyclist in the New Forest

First published in New Forest Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by

A 'MAJOR anti-cycling sentiment' in the New Forest could scupper multi-million pound plans for a 'Boris-bike'-style hire system.

Fears over aggravating the “anti-cycling” mood in the forest as well as concerns about sponsorship have led to an extraordinary meeting of the New Forest National Park Authority being called on Tuesday.

Officers and members are recommending the authority does not proceed with the New Forest Public Bike System - aimed at families and tourist rather than serious cyclists - due to the concerns.

A report to the committee says: “In the New Forest a major anti-cycling sentiment has come to the fore in the wake of large-scale cycle sportive events which have impacted on local people.

“A fresh wave of concern exists about the safety of on-road cycling. Concerns about safety featured prominently in the responses to the recent questionnaire about the proposed scheme, especially amongst those who live and work in the Forest.

“Members therefore questioned whether the time was right to introduce more cyclists onto New Forest roads.”

A petition has been set-up online urging the chief executive of the NPA to proceed with the scheme.

The recommendation follows continuing controversy over mass cycling events in the forest.

A charter was drawn up earlier this year for organisers of mass cycle rides following a flood of complaints about the speed and volume of cyclists taking part in the rides.

And a new round of controversy emerged after saboteurs tried to disrupt a Wiggle sportive ride by throwing nails across the route.

Last year, the Department for Transport awarded the New Forest NPA £3.57million to support family cycling in the park.

As well as an upgrade of certain cycle routes and a chance to improve cycling facilities, the programme also included the opportunity to implement a 'limited network' of bike docking stations alongside existing bike hire services.

This part of the programme would cost £2million of the £3.57million total funding.

Initial interest showed 11 of the 12 businesses contacted wanted to host a docking station on their land.

The proposal aimed to increase connectivity between communities and attractions and support the economy as it would allow shorter journeys by bike rather than the existing half or full day.

It was hoped the scheme would also help to reduce the amount of traffic in the area, a key aim of the organisation.

Funding needed to be spent and works completed by March 2015.

But despite a successful search for an operator, a so-called task and finish group recommended not to go ahead with the scheme.

A report to the meeting next week says the backdrop to cycling in the New Forest and elsewhere has 'changed significantly' since the original report was carried out.

The changes include fears over sponsorship since the main sponsor of the London Cycle Hire scheme has said it won't renew its sponsorship.

The authority says similar schemes have launched in Liverpool and Reading without a sponsor and the likelihood of money for the New Forest plan is 'markedly reduced'.

Along with the concerns about the 'anti-cycling sentiment', the report concludes that 'members had insufficient confidence that the project would now be financially sustainable or receive sufficient local support, and therefore be appropriate for the New Forest at this time.”

Earlier this year, the NPA dumped its chairman amid the continuing controversy over mass cycling events.

Retired company director Julian Johnson, 82, was ousted at the annual meeting after four years in the role.

Following a vote to replace him with his deputy, former Official Verderer Oliver Crosthwaite Eyre, members cited the need to tackle the problems being caused by huge cycling events in the area.

After the meeting members pointed out that Cllr Johnson lived in Wiltshire, whereas Mr Crosthwaite Eyre resided in the Forest.

At the time Cllr Maureen Holding said: “It needs someone who lives in the Forest and understands all the problems that cycling has brought.”

Comments (131)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:12pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Councillor Holding, cycling has NOT brought problems to the forest, it's those few morons who live there that want to complain about EVERYTHING and to try and turn the forest into their own private playground.
Councillor Holding, cycling has NOT brought problems to the forest, it's those few morons who live there that want to complain about EVERYTHING and to try and turn the forest into their own private playground. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 17

5:33pm Wed 13 Aug 14

ChopStick says...

When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them! ChopStick
  • Score: -34

5:40pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
[quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 31

5:48pm Wed 13 Aug 14

elvisimo says...

ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
That's a bit embarrassing
[quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]That's a bit embarrassing elvisimo
  • Score: 17

6:01pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Solent Soul says...

It's a fantastic idea & the thought of kissing away 3.5 million pounds in government funding is ludicrous! This sort of money won't be offered out again so should be seized with both hands! Not only will this boost tourism which in turn will bring in vital revenue to the local Forest businesses, but will also show how green transport can be integrated into an environment outside of London!
It's a fantastic idea & the thought of kissing away 3.5 million pounds in government funding is ludicrous! This sort of money won't be offered out again so should be seized with both hands! Not only will this boost tourism which in turn will bring in vital revenue to the local Forest businesses, but will also show how green transport can be integrated into an environment outside of London! Solent Soul
  • Score: 16

6:09pm Wed 13 Aug 14

loosehead says...

So the Nimby's have taken control. About time those who aren't opposed to cycling & actually cycle & live in the Forest stand up & take control of this authority.
So the Nimby's have taken control. About time those who aren't opposed to cycling & actually cycle & live in the Forest stand up & take control of this authority. loosehead
  • Score: 11

6:27pm Wed 13 Aug 14

downfader says...

loosehead wrote:
So the Nimby's have taken control. About time those who aren't opposed to cycling & actually cycle & live in the Forest stand up & take control of this authority.
Its worse than that. If they hand back the money it looks like they've not got the brains to administer other funded schemes. "Why should the New Forest get any Government money when they c*cked this simple process up?" will be the thinking.

Its incompetent.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So the Nimby's have taken control. About time those who aren't opposed to cycling & actually cycle & live in the Forest stand up & take control of this authority.[/p][/quote]Its worse than that. If they hand back the money it looks like they've not got the brains to administer other funded schemes. "Why should the New Forest get any Government money when they c*cked this simple process up?" will be the thinking. Its incompetent. downfader
  • Score: 9

6:45pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Nod says...

actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest
npa.gov.uk/news/arti
cle/570/rural_bike_s
cheme_to_help_drive_
down_car_journeys_in
_the_new_forest#.U-u
hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project, Nod
  • Score: 9

7:02pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Forest Resident says...

Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise. Forest Resident
  • Score: 9

7:08pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest

npa.gov.uk/news/arti

cle/570/rural_bike_s

cheme_to_help_drive_

down_car_journeys_in

_the_new_forest#.U-u

hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
[quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 6

7:25pm Wed 13 Aug 14

100%HANTSBOY says...

What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; )
What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; ) 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: -3

7:33pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Torchie1 says...

Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.
[quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him. Torchie1
  • Score: -1

7:40pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.
No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.[/p][/quote]No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 3

8:01pm Wed 13 Aug 14

RF says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True. RF
  • Score: 11

8:03pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.
[quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

8:09pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.
No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land.
When I drove around the forest at rush hour this afternoon the roads were flowing quite freely so I'll have to chalk up your little outburst alongside the two ton horses, the excessively fast HGVs going through Beaulieu and your ability to have someones insurance premium raised because their driving has upset you. Grow up Ginger and deal with facts not school-boy emotional hysteria.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.[/p][/quote]No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land.[/p][/quote]When I drove around the forest at rush hour this afternoon the roads were flowing quite freely so I'll have to chalk up your little outburst alongside the two ton horses, the excessively fast HGVs going through Beaulieu and your ability to have someones insurance premium raised because their driving has upset you. Grow up Ginger and deal with facts not school-boy emotional hysteria. Torchie1
  • Score: 1

8:10pm Wed 13 Aug 14

RF says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.
I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.[/p][/quote]I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger? RF
  • Score: -2

8:12pm Wed 13 Aug 14

RF says...

RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.
I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger?
What did the fox say?
[quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.[/p][/quote]I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger?[/p][/quote]What did the fox say? RF
  • Score: -1

8:12pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.
I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger?
Was the fox already dead?
[quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Frogs are pretty hard to see at the best of times and when people say wildlife of the forest, they usually mean the ponies and other larger, more easily seen animals.[/p][/quote]I once ran over a fox whilst on a bike. Do I need to go bigger?[/p][/quote]Was the fox already dead? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -10

8:14pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible. geoff51
  • Score: -5

8:17pm Wed 13 Aug 14

RF says...

No, it was hit by a unicycle in front of me which stunned it, then me, the fella on a penny farthing behind finished it off. Don't ride anymore, way too traumatic.
No, it was hit by a unicycle in front of me which stunned it, then me, the fella on a penny farthing behind finished it off. Don't ride anymore, way too traumatic. RF
  • Score: 2

8:17pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.
No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land.
When I drove around the forest at rush hour this afternoon the roads were flowing quite freely so I'll have to chalk up your little outburst alongside the two ton horses, the excessively fast HGVs going through Beaulieu and your ability to have someones insurance premium raised because their driving has upset you. Grow up Ginger and deal with facts not school-boy emotional hysteria.
The horse thing was used as an exageration, so what? You do similar things on EVERY comment you make here.
The HGV thing was about the roads LEADING into Beualieu, not going through it.
And I never said that I MYSELF could raise someone's due to their poor driving but that their INSURANCE company could do so if they found evidence that the person was behaving in a dangerous manner, also, companies DO raise your premium for poor driving standards.
So why don't YOU grow up and deal with FACTS?
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You are seeing a dose of reality injected in to the NPA by a resident commoner of the forest instead of the airy-fairy agenda driven by someone who lived in another county where it didn't affect him.[/p][/quote]No, you're living in a fantasy world if you think the forest is coping with the absurdly high numbers of motor vehicles using it's roads and if you think cyclists pose any sort of danger to the people and animals in the forest, then you are in cuckoo land.[/p][/quote]When I drove around the forest at rush hour this afternoon the roads were flowing quite freely so I'll have to chalk up your little outburst alongside the two ton horses, the excessively fast HGVs going through Beaulieu and your ability to have someones insurance premium raised because their driving has upset you. Grow up Ginger and deal with facts not school-boy emotional hysteria.[/p][/quote]The horse thing was used as an exageration, so what? You do similar things on EVERY comment you make here. The HGV thing was about the roads LEADING into Beualieu, not going through it. And I never said that I MYSELF could raise someone's due to their poor driving but that their INSURANCE company could do so if they found evidence that the person was behaving in a dangerous manner, also, companies DO raise your premium for poor driving standards. So why don't YOU grow up and deal with FACTS? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

8:19pm Wed 13 Aug 14

elvisimo says...

geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you.. elvisimo
  • Score: 9

8:22pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

elvisimo wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
Been on Holiday!
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you..[/p][/quote]Been on Holiday! geoff51
  • Score: -3

8:26pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

8:28pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

elvisimo wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you..[/p][/quote]He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

8:42pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up! geoff51
  • Score: 0

8:44pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit.
Pot Kettle Black!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you..[/p][/quote]He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit.[/p][/quote]Pot Kettle Black! geoff51
  • Score: 0

8:48pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

8:54pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit.
Pot Kettle Black!
Least I can admit I'm somewhat habitual, unlike you.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you..[/p][/quote]He was licking his wounds after last time, too bad he hasn't learned. Very typical amongst creatures of habit.[/p][/quote]Pot Kettle Black![/p][/quote]Least I can admit I'm somewhat habitual, unlike you. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

8:55pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way geoff51
  • Score: -7

8:56pm Wed 13 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling. good-gosh
  • Score: 0

8:57pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration! geoff51
  • Score: 0

8:58pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way[/p][/quote]Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

8:59pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
It's "cycling" not "bicycling" in Britain, also, surely you mean cycling is the cure for excessive car usage?
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]It's "cycling" not "bicycling" in Britain, also, surely you mean cycling is the cure for excessive car usage? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

9:00pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.
I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way[/p][/quote]Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.[/p][/quote]I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy? geoff51
  • Score: -7

9:00pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration![/p][/quote]You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -4

9:01pm Wed 13 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

geoff51 wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
Antibikeotics
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration![/p][/quote]Antibikeotics good-gosh
  • Score: 4

9:02pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.
I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?
The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha!
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way[/p][/quote]Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.[/p][/quote]I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?[/p][/quote]The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha! Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -4

9:04pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.
I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?
The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha!
Doesnt stop you being a idiot however you dress
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way[/p][/quote]Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.[/p][/quote]I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?[/p][/quote]The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha![/p][/quote]Doesnt stop you being a idiot however you dress geoff51
  • Score: -1

9:04pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
Antibikeotics
At least I'm not sat, stewing in a CARcinogen.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration![/p][/quote]Antibikeotics[/p][/quote]At least I'm not sat, stewing in a CARcinogen. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -10

9:05pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed.
Yours are missing until you reach puberty
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration![/p][/quote]You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed.[/p][/quote]Yours are missing until you reach puberty geoff51
  • Score: 0

9:07pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.
Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way
Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.
I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?
The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha!
Doesnt stop you being a idiot however you dress
At least I know the difference between a paid bike ride on a designated route and a bicycle race.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]No, it is NOT, if it was, times would be published ON THE DAY, not a WEEK later, there would be a podium and unless it was like the Red Bull Road Rage race(downhill road race), then only SPECIFIC bikes would be allowed to enter, as any others, would not conform to UCI regulations, a race would almost ALWAYS use CLOSED roads and would NOT allow children and women to ride in the same event, again, due to regulations, therefore, the Wiggle sportives, are NOT races, they are just large bike RIDES, no different to the sky ride, other than yes, you're timed but it's not for competetive use, it's for personal use.[/p][/quote]Yea Whatever! you carry on living in your fantasy world. Why dont you grow up like Torchie suggest and stop throwing you toys out of the pram when you dont get your own way[/p][/quote]Pfft, YOU are the ones who are living in fantasy worlds, grow up and smell the coffee.[/p][/quote]I have just picked up your toys, I found the under your pram! Was the Pfft a **** or have you just filled your Lycra nappy?[/p][/quote]The toys and pram are your own, mate and if I've told you once, I've told you 1000 times, I don't wear lycra, so, ha![/p][/quote]Doesnt stop you being a idiot however you dress[/p][/quote]At least I know the difference between a paid bike ride on a designated route and a bicycle race. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -9

9:09pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.
Castration!
You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed.
Yours are missing until you reach puberty
Says the childish OAP.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: One day, there may be a cure for bicycling.[/p][/quote]Castration![/p][/quote]You better go to the doctor then if you want your testicles removed.[/p][/quote]Yours are missing until you reach puberty[/p][/quote]Says the childish OAP. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -7

9:15pm Wed 13 Aug 14

southamptonadi says...

I think the NPA will lose a lot of respect, they are showing such an anti cycling stance, they don't even want families coming into the forest.

I have never met an anti cyclist in the forest. In person that is, there's a few on here but they could live anywhere.

Geoff, you won't see these bikes on the wiggle. Although if they ever do this scheme, I will take one on the next wiggle for a right laugh.

And Geoff you do realise that's its comments like yours against any cyclists that have jeopardised this scheme that would of benefited tourism and the families that would use it, that's quite selfish on yours and other anti wiggles out there.
I think the NPA will lose a lot of respect, they are showing such an anti cycling stance, they don't even want families coming into the forest. I have never met an anti cyclist in the forest. In person that is, there's a few on here but they could live anywhere. Geoff, you won't see these bikes on the wiggle. Although if they ever do this scheme, I will take one on the next wiggle for a right laugh. And Geoff you do realise that's its comments like yours against any cyclists that have jeopardised this scheme that would of benefited tourism and the families that would use it, that's quite selfish on yours and other anti wiggles out there. southamptonadi
  • Score: 5

9:17pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

southamptonadi wrote:
I think the NPA will lose a lot of respect, they are showing such an anti cycling stance, they don't even want families coming into the forest.

I have never met an anti cyclist in the forest. In person that is, there's a few on here but they could live anywhere.

Geoff, you won't see these bikes on the wiggle. Although if they ever do this scheme, I will take one on the next wiggle for a right laugh.

And Geoff you do realise that's its comments like yours against any cyclists that have jeopardised this scheme that would of benefited tourism and the families that would use it, that's quite selfish on yours and other anti wiggles out there.
Exactly.
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: I think the NPA will lose a lot of respect, they are showing such an anti cycling stance, they don't even want families coming into the forest. I have never met an anti cyclist in the forest. In person that is, there's a few on here but they could live anywhere. Geoff, you won't see these bikes on the wiggle. Although if they ever do this scheme, I will take one on the next wiggle for a right laugh. And Geoff you do realise that's its comments like yours against any cyclists that have jeopardised this scheme that would of benefited tourism and the families that would use it, that's quite selfish on yours and other anti wiggles out there.[/p][/quote]Exactly. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Wed 13 Aug 14

elvisimo says...

geoff51 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
I have missed you..
Been on Holiday!
welcome back to Groundhog Day. More Lycra based comments please.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]I have missed you..[/p][/quote]Been on Holiday![/p][/quote]welcome back to Groundhog Day. More Lycra based comments please. elvisimo
  • Score: 3

9:24pm Wed 13 Aug 14

forest hump says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest


npa.gov.uk/news/arti


cle/570/rural_bike_s


cheme_to_help_drive_


down_car_journeys_in


_the_new_forest#.U-u


hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t forest hump
  • Score: -1

9:39pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Quite Frankly says...

geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up. Quite Frankly
  • Score: 0

10:00pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
[quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race. geoff51
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Wed 13 Aug 14

forest hump says...

geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
G51, don't waste your breath. Give the nutters enough rope..........
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]G51, don't waste your breath. Give the nutters enough rope.......... forest hump
  • Score: 1

10:13pm Wed 13 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

I was always told you cant have an arguement with a nutter because they never admit to being wrong, but like you say they usual hang themself given enough rope.
I was always told you cant have an arguement with a nutter because they never admit to being wrong, but like you say they usual hang themself given enough rope. geoff51
  • Score: -3

10:16pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest



npa.gov.uk/news/arti



cle/570/rural_bike_s



cheme_to_help_drive_



down_car_journeys_in



_the_new_forest#.U-u



hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

10:18pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Sir Ad E Noid says...

Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You don't even live in the Forest, why are you worried about what the NPA do? If I lived in Marchwood, I would be worried about the cyclists wobbling over the roads where lots of lorries thunder by. Now that is a worry.
[quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You don't even live in the Forest, why are you worried about what the NPA do? If I lived in Marchwood, I would be worried about the cyclists wobbling over the roads where lots of lorries thunder by. Now that is a worry. Sir Ad E Noid
  • Score: 8

10:19pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -10

10:22pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.
It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.[/p][/quote]It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA. Torchie1
  • Score: 7

10:23pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Sir Ad E Noid wrote:
Forest Resident wrote:
Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.
You don't even live in the Forest, why are you worried about what the NPA do? If I lived in Marchwood, I would be worried about the cyclists wobbling over the roads where lots of lorries thunder by. Now that is a worry.
That's a stupid comment, makes it sound as if cyclists outnumber motorists in Marchwood which most certainly, can not be right.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Ad E Noid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Until such time as the New a Forest NPA can quantify their assertions of 'anti cycling sentiment' it should be rightly dismissed as the anecdotal bigotry it really is. The NPA themselves proposed this scheme, bid for the money, secured it, put it out to tender, and secured a preferred supplier, only now they want to waste all that time & public money because of the views of a handful of anti cycling NIMBYs. This is entirely unacceptable to anyone, whether a cyclist or otherwise.[/p][/quote]You don't even live in the Forest, why are you worried about what the NPA do? If I lived in Marchwood, I would be worried about the cyclists wobbling over the roads where lots of lorries thunder by. Now that is a worry.[/p][/quote]That's a stupid comment, makes it sound as if cyclists outnumber motorists in Marchwood which most certainly, can not be right. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -10

10:26pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.
It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.
Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice.
Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.[/p][/quote]It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice. Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -4

10:35pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.
It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.
Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice.
Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion.
I think you're getting tired now, perhaps you ought to give the clips one more polish and go to bed.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.[/p][/quote]It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice. Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion.[/p][/quote]I think you're getting tired now, perhaps you ought to give the clips one more polish and go to bed. Torchie1
  • Score: 4

10:38pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head?

Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not.

Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view.
As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.
It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.
Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice.
Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion.
I think you're getting tired now, perhaps you ought to give the clips one more polish and go to bed.
Uncle Frank is tired? You better sleep where you are then, no need to make yourself more tired by getting up to go to bed, good night Uncle Frank. No, put that sherry down.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Only ones here with a narrow view point are the anti-cyclists such as yourself, who make up a TINY minority.[/p][/quote]It's amazing how this 'tiny minority' have managed to sway the NPA.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately, Uncle Frank in the dark corner with his sherry is the one with the loudest voice. Basically meaning, the ones that people don't want to associate with are the ones most likely to get their voices heard because they cause all of the comotion.[/p][/quote]I think you're getting tired now, perhaps you ought to give the clips one more polish and go to bed.[/p][/quote]Uncle Frank is tired? You better sleep where you are then, no need to make yourself more tired by getting up to go to bed, good night Uncle Frank. No, put that sherry down. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -6

12:05am Thu 14 Aug 14

Drhysted says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
Well Jeff I have never taken part in a race. But I have taken part in many Sportives organised by UK Cycle Events, a company based and run in the New Forest.
A company that have been holding events in the New Forest since before 2009 without incident until 2013.
A company that holds Sportives throughout the country (and outside this country) without any problems. But yet when on their home ground there is uninformed and generally inaccurate complaints levelled against them. This really sugests that the problem is not with the events, but with the residents.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]Well Jeff I have never taken part in a race. But I have taken part in many Sportives organised by UK Cycle Events, a company based and run in the New Forest. A company that have been holding events in the New Forest since before 2009 without incident until 2013. A company that holds Sportives throughout the country (and outside this country) without any problems. But yet when on their home ground there is uninformed and generally inaccurate complaints levelled against them. This really sugests that the problem is not with the events, but with the residents. Drhysted
  • Score: 1

6:45am Thu 14 Aug 14

Drhysted says...

Drhysted wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap.
I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed.
Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.
I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up!
Well Jeff I have never taken part in a race. But I have taken part in many Sportives organised by UK Cycle Events, a company based and run in the New Forest.
A company that have been holding events in the New Forest since before 2009 without incident until 2013.
A company that holds Sportives throughout the country (and outside this country) without any problems. But yet when on their home ground there is uninformed and generally inaccurate complaints levelled against them. This really sugests that the problem is not with the events, but with the residents.
I should add that I am now ashamed to admit that I am a resident, and after the reaction I got from a person in Scotland earlier this year upon finding out where I am from. I will probably not admit it to others any more.

It is embarrassing that we are now portrayed as inbreed knuckle dragging NIMBYs to the entire country.
[quote][p][bold]Drhysted[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]But the events that have been held there are NOT races, they're large bike RIDES, yes you get 1 or 2 idiots but when DON'T you get them? The ONLY actual races held in the forest, that involve bikes, are a few biathlons, triathlons and duathlons, run by a company called "Race New Forest", the Wiggle events aren't really any different to the sky ride.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ Wiggle IS A RACE whatever way you dress it up![/p][/quote]Well Jeff I have never taken part in a race. But I have taken part in many Sportives organised by UK Cycle Events, a company based and run in the New Forest. A company that have been holding events in the New Forest since before 2009 without incident until 2013. A company that holds Sportives throughout the country (and outside this country) without any problems. But yet when on their home ground there is uninformed and generally inaccurate complaints levelled against them. This really sugests that the problem is not with the events, but with the residents.[/p][/quote]I should add that I am now ashamed to admit that I am a resident, and after the reaction I got from a person in Scotland earlier this year upon finding out where I am from. I will probably not admit it to others any more. It is embarrassing that we are now portrayed as inbreed knuckle dragging NIMBYs to the entire country. Drhysted
  • Score: -2

6:59am Thu 14 Aug 14

loosehead says...

I watched a program where a 62 year old man took up cycling.by getting into exercise he's eventually gotten rid of his diabetes & he loves ridinf his bike.
In his words "It's like a new lease on life" how can posters or people knock a pursuit that can help to do that?
I watched a program where a 62 year old man took up cycling.by getting into exercise he's eventually gotten rid of his diabetes & he loves ridinf his bike. In his words "It's like a new lease on life" how can posters or people knock a pursuit that can help to do that? loosehead
  • Score: 2

9:29am Thu 14 Aug 14

forest hump says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest




npa.gov.uk/news/arti




cle/570/rural_bike_s




cheme_to_help_drive_




down_car_journeys_in




_the_new_forest#.U-u




hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over. forest hump
  • Score: -1

9:30am Thu 14 Aug 14

Quite Frankly says...

geoff51 wrote:
Quite Frankly wrote:
geoff51 wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.
Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.
And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.
Breath in through the nose; then out through the mouth - making sure your knuckles are not on the ground.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quite Frankly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: What these Cycling idiots dont realise it is their arrogant intransigent attitude and mass races in the forest that have turned local residents against this scheme, what you sow you reap. I personally have no problem with the visitors and families that will make use of this scheme as they are not the ones that have caused problems in the past and are welcome to enjoy the beauty of the forest at a sensible speed. Those who race around the forest never enjoy the surroundings as the are head down **** up trying to go as fast as possible.[/p][/quote]Have you had a bang on the head? Fortunately, for rational people, it is not 'your' forest. You may have some deep-seated fear of people having fun on their infernal velocipedes. Normal people do not. Nobody cares what you think. Get a hobby, and stop your childish, attention-seeking behaviour. You're showing yourself up.[/p][/quote]And nobody is interested in the sad cyclists who get upset when someone dares to disagree with their narrow point of view. As i said before I would have no problem with this scheme as the users will come to enjoy the forests, not to use the narrow roads for a cycle race.[/p][/quote]Breath in through the nose; then out through the mouth - making sure your knuckles are not on the ground. Quite Frankly
  • Score: 4

10:28am Thu 14 Aug 14

Solent Soul says...

forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest





npa.gov.uk/news/arti





cle/570/rural_bike_s





cheme_to_help_drive_





down_car_journeys_in





_the_new_forest#.U-u





hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.[/p][/quote]Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns.. Solent Soul
  • Score: 9

10:28am Thu 14 Aug 14

camerajuan says...

Oh my word Jeffy give the world a break and stop your nonsense! Where did you find this pointless rage against a group of people who have done nothing to you personally ??

You're an utter idiot and you need to find a hobby, seriously. Grow up.
Oh my word Jeffy give the world a break and stop your nonsense! Where did you find this pointless rage against a group of people who have done nothing to you personally ?? You're an utter idiot and you need to find a hobby, seriously. Grow up. camerajuan
  • Score: 5

12:56pm Thu 14 Aug 14

sass says...

RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Who cares about the french!
[quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Who cares about the french! sass
  • Score: 2

12:56pm Thu 14 Aug 14

sass says...

RF wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
ChopStick wrote:
When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them!
Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.
Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.
Who cares about the french!
[quote][p][bold]RF[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChopStick[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists accept that the majority of people don't want them in the new forest.. When they're not urinating and defecating all over the place they're either endangering wildlife or terrifying women and children in their skin tight lycra costumes.. No one wants them![/p][/quote]Actually, the majority DO want cyclists in the forest as it's BETTER for the forest, we don't "urinate and defecate everywhere", we might urinate in a secluded bush but then what person HASN'T done so when they've been caught short?, we do NOT endanger wildlife unlike motorists(just look through the echo and count how many reports of animals killed by CARS there are compared to those killed by cyclists... Oh wait, you can't because cyclists have NEVER injured or killed any wildlife in the forest, you moron) and most of us do NOT terrify people, we're a friendly bunch of people, honestly.[/p][/quote]Not strictly true, I once killed a frog whilst riding a bike in the forest. True.[/p][/quote]Who cares about the french! sass
  • Score: 1

1:12pm Thu 14 Aug 14

023 80 says...

Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...
Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks... 023 80
  • Score: 1

2:45pm Thu 14 Aug 14

forest hump says...

Solent Soul wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest






npa.gov.uk/news/arti






cle/570/rural_bike_s






cheme_to_help_drive_






down_car_journeys_in






_the_new_forest#.U-u






hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..
Absolute nonsense
[quote][p][bold]Solent Soul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.[/p][/quote]Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..[/p][/quote]Absolute nonsense forest hump
  • Score: 1

2:47pm Thu 14 Aug 14

forest hump says...

023 80 wrote:
Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...
what are "furries/steampunks" ?
[quote][p][bold]023 80[/bold] wrote: Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...[/p][/quote]what are "furries/steampunks" ? forest hump
  • Score: 4

2:48pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Dan Soton says...

,,

From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth...


,,
,, From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth... ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 5

4:03pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest





npa.gov.uk/news/arti





cle/570/rural_bike_s





cheme_to_help_drive_





down_car_journeys_in





_the_new_forest#.U-u





hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
No, they are not "perfectly adequate", they fall far BELOW standards that the GOVERNMENT has set, being that cycle lanes should be a MINIMUM of 1.5 meters wide, also, I was talking about OFF-ROAD cycle tracks being 6 bikes wide for safety, NOT cycle lanes.
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.[/p][/quote]No, they are not "perfectly adequate", they fall far BELOW standards that the GOVERNMENT has set, being that cycle lanes should be a MINIMUM of 1.5 meters wide, also, I was talking about OFF-ROAD cycle tracks being 6 bikes wide for safety, NOT cycle lanes. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -5

4:04pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Solent Soul wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest






npa.gov.uk/news/arti






cle/570/rural_bike_s






cheme_to_help_drive_






down_car_journeys_in






_the_new_forest#.U-u






hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..
Exactly.
[quote][p][bold]Solent Soul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.[/p][/quote]Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..[/p][/quote]Exactly. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

4:09pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

023 80 wrote:
Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...
I'm a furry and take no offence to this as some CAN be really annoying.
[quote][p][bold]023 80[/bold] wrote: Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...[/p][/quote]I'm a furry and take no offence to this as some CAN be really annoying. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

4:10pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

forest hump wrote:
Solent Soul wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Nod wrote:
actually looking at the detail of the original propsal:

http://www.newforest







npa.gov.uk/news/arti







cle/570/rural_bike_s







cheme_to_help_drive_







down_car_journeys_in







_the_new_forest#.U-u







hh-NdUrI

The programme includes:

"Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information"

so thats public money going towards a private business then.

"A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest."

okay but

"The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year."

127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems.

but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards

"Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents"

Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,
Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.
Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t
6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?
The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.
Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..
Absolute nonsense
Yes, clearly you're full of it.
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Solent Soul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nod[/bold] wrote: actually looking at the detail of the original propsal: http://www.newforest npa.gov.uk/news/arti cle/570/rural_bike_s cheme_to_help_drive_ down_car_journeys_in _the_new_forest#.U-u hh-NdUrI The programme includes: "Support for a proposed private sector led family cycling centre adjacent to Brockenhurst rail station with bike hire, servicing, showers, lockers, courses, and visitor information" so thats public money going towards a private business then. "A procurement consultant has been appointed by the New Forest National Park Authority to find suppliers for about 250 bikes at 20 docking stations in the south east of the New Forest." okay but "The proposed projects will be delivered by April 2015 and will promote active family lifestyles, respect the sensitive character of the New Forest and replace an estimated 127,000 car journeys with bike trips every year." 127,000 a year. Thats 350 car journeys per day, so I think some of the 250 bikes need to be at least Tandems. but also some of the 3.47 million was going towards "Developing a pilot Pedal Bus fleet at key attractions in the National Park, where up to eight passengers can help the driver power the ‘bus’ to the next stop as an enjoyable car-free experience for visitors and residents" Read the detail, and you'll realize that 3.5 mil can be better spent elsewhere, rather than this ill thought out project,[/p][/quote]Could be better spent on cycle tracks that are CONNECTED, wide enough for 6 bikes to ride side by side, resurfaced roads for when cycle tracks physically can NOT be implemented AND spent on a MUCH bigger bike share scheme.[/p][/quote]Six bikes side by side!? You are a tw@t[/p][/quote]6 bike wide cycle track would allow for 2 cyclists traveling in each direction while allowing for space between each cyclist for safety, so how am I a tw@t, as you so elequantly put it, for suggesting the implementation of a safe, truly Dutch style cycle track?[/p][/quote]The cycle lanes of today are perfectly adequate. Only tw@ts like yourself refuse to use them. You deserve to get run over.[/p][/quote]Cyclists can lawfully ride on the roads even if there is a cycle path present; If the so called cycle paths were fit for purpose, ie designed properly so that they actually encouraged people to use them, were not covered in glass, road debris & left in a general bad state of affairs then I'm sure more cyclists would.. If it's such an issue for you then maybe you should start petitioning the relevant authorities with ur concerns..[/p][/quote]Absolute nonsense[/p][/quote]Yes, clearly you're full of it. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

4:26pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

forest hump wrote:
023 80 wrote:
Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...
what are "furries/steamp
unks" ?
A furry(like me) is someone who has a keen interest in anthropomorphic(huma
n like) creatures in past and present culture, such as mickey mouse, werewolves and etc.
Steampunks(not like me) are people who have a keen interest in applying modern speculation to age past technology and society, most commonly focused on tech and society from the Industrial revolution, also, look up "Professor Elemental", a well known Steampunk singer/songwriter.
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]023 80[/bold] wrote: Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...[/p][/quote]what are "furries/steamp unks" ?[/p][/quote]A furry(like me) is someone who has a keen interest in anthropomorphic(huma n like) creatures in past and present culture, such as mickey mouse, werewolves and etc. Steampunks(not like me) are people who have a keen interest in applying modern speculation to age past technology and society, most commonly focused on tech and society from the Industrial revolution, also, look up "Professor Elemental", a well known Steampunk singer/songwriter. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

4:45pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Polemicist. says...

I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads. Polemicist.
  • Score: 1

6:29pm Thu 14 Aug 14

forest hump says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
forest hump wrote:
023 80 wrote:
Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...
what are "furries/steamp

unks" ?
A furry(like me) is someone who has a keen interest in anthropomorphic(huma

n like) creatures in past and present culture, such as mickey mouse, werewolves and etc.
Steampunks(not like me) are people who have a keen interest in applying modern speculation to age past technology and society, most commonly focused on tech and society from the Industrial revolution, also, look up "Professor Elemental", a well known Steampunk singer/songwriter.
Thank you, you learn every day
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]023 80[/bold] wrote: Cyclists in general really aren't that bad. Imagine if the Forest regularly drew hordes of *really* annoying people like furries or steampunks...[/p][/quote]what are "furries/steamp unks" ?[/p][/quote]A furry(like me) is someone who has a keen interest in anthropomorphic(huma n like) creatures in past and present culture, such as mickey mouse, werewolves and etc. Steampunks(not like me) are people who have a keen interest in applying modern speculation to age past technology and society, most commonly focused on tech and society from the Industrial revolution, also, look up "Professor Elemental", a well known Steampunk singer/songwriter.[/p][/quote]Thank you, you learn every day forest hump
  • Score: 1

6:58pm Thu 14 Aug 14

GrahamSimmons says...

Polemicist. wrote:
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
"need", lol.
[quote][p][bold]Polemicist.[/bold] wrote: I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.[/p][/quote]"need", lol. GrahamSimmons
  • Score: -4

7:00pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

GrahamSimmons wrote:
Polemicist. wrote:
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
"need", lol.
And the usual opening of "I've cycled myself." or "I cycle myself." and it's like, "No, you probably only took a bike for a 2 minute ride to the shops and back one time.".
[quote][p][bold]GrahamSimmons[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Polemicist.[/bold] wrote: I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.[/p][/quote]"need", lol.[/p][/quote]And the usual opening of "I've cycled myself." or "I cycle myself." and it's like, "No, you probably only took a bike for a 2 minute ride to the shops and back one time.". Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -5

7:09pm Thu 14 Aug 14

redsnapper says...

I,m surprised they don't film Deliverance 2 in the NF..the locals are so redneck and anti everything it.s unbelievable. And to think I went to school in Brockenhurst .. There again enjoyment for some whilst waiting for the transports home was lobbing dried cow pats at each other. Forest life..
I,m surprised they don't film Deliverance 2 in the NF..the locals are so redneck and anti everything it.s unbelievable. And to think I went to school in Brockenhurst .. There again enjoyment for some whilst waiting for the transports home was lobbing dried cow pats at each other. Forest life.. redsnapper
  • Score: -2

8:17pm Thu 14 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

GrahamSimmons wrote:
Polemicist. wrote:
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
"need", lol.
Have you been away and then have just been released from your straight jacket only you havent posted your bile on here for a long time?
[quote][p][bold]GrahamSimmons[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Polemicist.[/bold] wrote: I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.[/p][/quote]"need", lol.[/p][/quote]Have you been away and then have just been released from your straight jacket only you havent posted your bile on here for a long time? geoff51
  • Score: 0

8:24pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
GrahamSimmons wrote:
Polemicist. wrote:
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
"need", lol.
Have you been away and then have just been released from your straight jacket only you havent posted your bile on here for a long time?
Who's the one posting bile Uncle Frank?
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GrahamSimmons[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Polemicist.[/bold] wrote: I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.[/p][/quote]"need", lol.[/p][/quote]Have you been away and then have just been released from your straight jacket only you havent posted your bile on here for a long time?[/p][/quote]Who's the one posting bile Uncle Frank? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -4

8:49pm Thu 14 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun. good-gosh
  • Score: 2

8:54pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

9:00pm Thu 14 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
Only if you are a masochist!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]Only if you are a masochist! geoff51
  • Score: 0

9:06pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
Only if you are a masochist!
No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]Only if you are a masochist![/p][/quote]No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

9:13pm Thu 14 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
Only if you are a masochist!
No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry.
not this week
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]Only if you are a masochist![/p][/quote]No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry.[/p][/quote]not this week good-gosh
  • Score: 4

9:14pm Thu 14 Aug 14

southamptonadi says...

Polemicist. wrote:
I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.
How about the old person doing 10 mph down a national speed limit road. They should also show courtesy and move out of my way, don't they know I'm more important.

How about the caravan doing 5 mph because they can't tow, do they move out of the way too.

If you need to pass USE THE OTHER SIDE. OF THE ROAD, it's called overtaking. See the Highway Code if your having trouble. If it's single lane you shouldn't be overtaking anyway.

There's lots of inconsiderate people on today's roads, should I come on here and moan about them all.
[quote][p][bold]Polemicist.[/bold] wrote: I do not mind cyclists', I have done cycling myself. when road users need to get to their destination, for example taking my child to our local doctor, it is very frustrating when you come across multiple cyclists riding two or three abreast chatting away to one another totally unaware that you need to pass, just a bit of courtesy to others would go a long way to help their cause. we all like bees in our gardens but none like swarms, this is how it sometimes feels when cyclists' are in mass on narrow forest roads.[/p][/quote]How about the old person doing 10 mph down a national speed limit road. They should also show courtesy and move out of my way, don't they know I'm more important. How about the caravan doing 5 mph because they can't tow, do they move out of the way too. If you need to pass USE THE OTHER SIDE. OF THE ROAD, it's called overtaking. See the Highway Code if your having trouble. If it's single lane you shouldn't be overtaking anyway. There's lots of inconsiderate people on today's roads, should I come on here and moan about them all. southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

9:16pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
geoff51 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
Only if you are a masochist!
No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry.
not this week
If I cycled to work this week(unable to due to damage caused by lack of road maintenance that I PAY for through council tax), then I would have only been rained on ONCE, also, the 97% is for the whole YEAR.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]Only if you are a masochist![/p][/quote]No, it's called using sustainable transport, also, cyclists in Britain have a 97% chance of staying dry.[/p][/quote]not this week[/p][/quote]If I cycled to work this week(unable to due to damage caused by lack of road maintenance that I PAY for through council tax), then I would have only been rained on ONCE, also, the 97% is for the whole YEAR. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

9:19pm Thu 14 Aug 14

southamptonadi says...

I love how a cycling story even about family cyclists coming to the forest to spend money can turn into this hatred.

It's like me commenting on a saints story and discussing netball It's irelevent. Roadies and wiggle riders etc are not going to hire these bikes.

It's like a group of hells angels hiring mopeds.

Makes me want to drive my car real slow around the forest, coz that's ok it's not a bike
I love how a cycling story even about family cyclists coming to the forest to spend money can turn into this hatred. It's like me commenting on a saints story and discussing netball It's irelevent. Roadies and wiggle riders etc are not going to hire these bikes. It's like a group of hells angels hiring mopeds. Makes me want to drive my car real slow around the forest, coz that's ok it's not a bike southamptonadi
  • Score: 4

9:23pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Buzzard2 says...

OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go. Buzzard2
  • Score: 5

9:31pm Thu 14 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation. geoff51
  • Score: 3

9:52pm Thu 14 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
The only exhilaration was getting home late at night without being made to walk the last 10 miles home by the police for having no lights or brakes on an arterial road.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]The only exhilaration was getting home late at night without being made to walk the last 10 miles home by the police for having no lights or brakes on an arterial road. good-gosh
  • Score: 3

10:31pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.
It's exhilerating.
The only exhilaration was getting home late at night without being made to walk the last 10 miles home by the police for having no lights or brakes on an arterial road.
Should have gone prepared, I always take lights with me and make sure to check my bike every so often, also, it's perfectly legal to cycle on most A-roads(arterial roads), if it wasn't, I wouldn't be able to get out of Thornhill on my bike as the area is encircled in A-roads.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: My memories of cycling thousands of miles in school holidays are of being soaking wet and freezing cold for endless hours in rain drenched headwinds, with a choice between battling on or dying on the roadside. And they call it fun.[/p][/quote]It's exhilerating.[/p][/quote]The only exhilaration was getting home late at night without being made to walk the last 10 miles home by the police for having no lights or brakes on an arterial road.[/p][/quote]Should have gone prepared, I always take lights with me and make sure to check my bike every so often, also, it's perfectly legal to cycle on most A-roads(arterial roads), if it wasn't, I wouldn't be able to get out of Thornhill on my bike as the area is encircled in A-roads. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

10:38pm Thu 14 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously.
Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route.
Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?
[quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously. Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route. Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -4

10:37am Fri 15 Aug 14

camerajuan says...

geoff51 wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.
Sorry but telling people when and how they should visit public attractions is not understanding anything.

The sportives don't cause death of animals or people, they don't cause pollution and they cause people aggro if they're stupid enough to ignore the alternative route planner offered. It's like hearing there's 4 cruise ships in town and saying "Well, I'll take the road to the docks today". You can't complain about your own ignorance.

Thousands of people visit the new forest every week and leave behind mess, damage, dead animals and empty beer cans but the 3 or 4 weekends a year that a scheduled, organised, advertised ride takes place then the participants are somehow branded Nazis?!?! Who wrote that rule book?!?! It must have been Patch Adams or Alexi Sayle or someone equally as mental.

You may not agree with it, but it happens. And there's not a d@mn thing you can do about it. Deal with it or shut up.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.[/p][/quote]Sorry but telling people when and how they should visit public attractions is not understanding anything. The sportives don't cause death of animals or people, they don't cause pollution and they cause people aggro if they're stupid enough to ignore the alternative route planner offered. It's like hearing there's 4 cruise ships in town and saying "Well, I'll take the road to the docks today". You can't complain about your own ignorance. Thousands of people visit the new forest every week and leave behind mess, damage, dead animals and empty beer cans but the 3 or 4 weekends a year that a scheduled, organised, advertised ride takes place then the participants are somehow branded Nazis?!?! Who wrote that rule book?!?! It must have been Patch Adams or Alexi Sayle or someone equally as mental. You may not agree with it, but it happens. And there's not a d@mn thing you can do about it. Deal with it or shut up. camerajuan
  • Score: 0

10:48am Fri 15 Aug 14

Torchie1 says...

Almost 40% of the replies from an angst ridden youth who must surely be as as welcome in the world of bicycles as Southy is in the world of politics, as both hope that no-one questions their exaggerated and fanciful claims. Perhaps a stage career could be the answer to both of these inventive posters.
Almost 40% of the replies from an angst ridden youth who must surely be as as welcome in the world of bicycles as Southy is in the world of politics, as both hope that no-one questions their exaggerated and fanciful claims. Perhaps a stage career could be the answer to both of these inventive posters. Torchie1
  • Score: 2

12:36pm Fri 15 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Almost 40% of the replies from an angst ridden youth who must surely be as as welcome in the world of bicycles as Southy is in the world of politics, as both hope that no-one questions their exaggerated and fanciful claims. Perhaps a stage career could be the answer to both of these inventive posters.
You and geoff are not "angst ridden youths", you're a pair of spiteful old men, out to make everybody else's lives a misery, just to try and make yourselves feel a little better.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: Almost 40% of the replies from an angst ridden youth who must surely be as as welcome in the world of bicycles as Southy is in the world of politics, as both hope that no-one questions their exaggerated and fanciful claims. Perhaps a stage career could be the answer to both of these inventive posters.[/p][/quote]You and geoff are not "angst ridden youths", you're a pair of spiteful old men, out to make everybody else's lives a misery, just to try and make yourselves feel a little better. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

1:15pm Fri 15 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

The wife told me that the best way to get to ASDA was to hop on a bike. It didn’t work well at first - the pedal went down OK but wouldn’t come back up. But she fixed the problem - told me to hop with both legs, alternately. The coordination was tricky but it worked. She's amazing…!
The wife told me that the best way to get to ASDA was to hop on a bike. It didn’t work well at first - the pedal went down OK but wouldn’t come back up. But she fixed the problem - told me to hop with both legs, alternately. The coordination was tricky but it worked. She's amazing…! good-gosh
  • Score: 0

9:55am Sat 16 Aug 14

southamptonadi says...

geoff51 wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.
Really.

As quoted from the lymington times

However, a special group set up by the NPA to look into the plans and make a recommendation argued the time was not right for the scheme. In a report submitted to members, it said “the backdrop to cycling in the New Forest and elsewhere has changed significantly”.
Hostile reaction by some residents to the recent Wiggle Sportive mass cycling events through the Forest was cited as one major development.

So yes the NPA feel anti cycling sentiment is enough to cancel this scheme. Exactly what the echo says.

Half of your post is about nothing anyone had talked about

You need to need the posts before commenting. Just another ignorant forester.

NPA hates cyclists whoever they are. This is just an excuse to cover up the hatred. They are the ones who lie over and over again even local forest councilers have cone out in the papers and told us.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.[/p][/quote]Really. As quoted from the lymington times However, a special group set up by the NPA to look into the plans and make a recommendation argued the time was not right for the scheme. In a report submitted to members, it said “the backdrop to cycling in the New Forest and elsewhere has changed significantly”. Hostile reaction by some residents to the recent Wiggle Sportive mass cycling events through the Forest was cited as one major development. So yes the NPA feel anti cycling sentiment is enough to cancel this scheme. Exactly what the echo says. Half of your post is about nothing anyone had talked about You need to need the posts before commenting. Just another ignorant forester. NPA hates cyclists whoever they are. This is just an excuse to cover up the hatred. They are the ones who lie over and over again even local forest councilers have cone out in the papers and told us. southamptonadi
  • Score: -1

9:56am Sat 16 Aug 14

southamptonadi says...

geoff51 wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.
Really.

As quoted from the lymington times

However, a special group set up by the NPA to look into the plans and make a recommendation argued the time was not right for the scheme. In a report submitted to members, it said “the backdrop to cycling in the New Forest and elsewhere has changed significantly”.
Hostile reaction by some residents to the recent Wiggle Sportive mass cycling events through the Forest was cited as one major development.

So yes the NPA feel anti cycling sentiment is enough to cancel this scheme. Exactly what the echo says.

Half of your post is about nothing anyone had talked about

You need to need the posts before commenting. Just another ignorant forester.

NPA hates cyclists whoever they are. This is just an excuse to cover up the hatred. They are the ones who lie over and over again even local forest councilers have cone out in the papers and told us.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]Hooray at last a very sensible post by someone who understands the sentiment that has created this situation.[/p][/quote]Really. As quoted from the lymington times However, a special group set up by the NPA to look into the plans and make a recommendation argued the time was not right for the scheme. In a report submitted to members, it said “the backdrop to cycling in the New Forest and elsewhere has changed significantly”. Hostile reaction by some residents to the recent Wiggle Sportive mass cycling events through the Forest was cited as one major development. So yes the NPA feel anti cycling sentiment is enough to cancel this scheme. Exactly what the echo says. Half of your post is about nothing anyone had talked about You need to need the posts before commenting. Just another ignorant forester. NPA hates cyclists whoever they are. This is just an excuse to cover up the hatred. They are the ones who lie over and over again even local forest councilers have cone out in the papers and told us. southamptonadi
  • Score: -2

4:33pm Sat 16 Aug 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
,,

From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth...


,,
,,

100%HANTSBOY says... What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; )


You want to waste your money on cars and have sole rights to unsustainable tarmac roads.. you're more than welcome to them..


Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighways not only pay for themselves, cyclists can be paid to use them ; ¬)



https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp
gzU



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: ,, From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth... ,,[/p][/quote],, 100%HANTSBOY says... What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; ) You want to waste your money on cars and have sole rights to unsustainable tarmac roads.. you're more than welcome to them.. Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighways not only pay for themselves, cyclists can be paid to use them ; ¬) https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp gzU ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 2

10:32am Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously.
Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route.
Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?
Please get your facts straight, Ginger. According to Wiggle's own website past events have approached 3,000 per day, and the Spring Sportive was advertised at 2,200 per day. This does not include the large numbers of unpaid entrants who join in for the ride. I'm not certain if it includes the juniors who are entered but ride free.

Please could we eliminate all personal attacks, bad language (even in ****) and irrelevant comments, and try to have a reasonable discussion?

Support for 'family cycling' is high on my agenda, but there do seem to be some valid reasons for refusing the project at Brockenhurst. Let's hope these can be sorted out.

Please desist from calling nimbies people who call for proper regulation of MASS cycling events because l these sour the ground against all cycling in the Forest.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously. Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route. Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?[/p][/quote]Please get your facts straight, Ginger. According to Wiggle's own website past events have approached 3,000 per day, and the Spring Sportive was advertised at 2,200 per day. This does not include the large numbers of unpaid entrants who join in for the ride. I'm not certain if it includes the juniors who are entered but ride free. Please could we eliminate all personal attacks, bad language (even in ****) and irrelevant comments, and try to have a reasonable discussion? Support for 'family cycling' is high on my agenda, but there do seem to be some valid reasons for refusing the project at Brockenhurst. Let's hope these can be sorted out. Please desist from calling nimbies people who call for proper regulation of MASS cycling events because l these sour the ground against all cycling in the Forest. Reconciler
  • Score: 2

10:45am Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously.
Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route.
Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?
I'd appreciate it if you got your facts straight, Ginger. Wiggle's own website advertised previous events sold out at 3,000, and the Spring Sportive at 2,200. I don't know if this includes juniors riding free, but it doesn't include the large number of savvy people who choose to join in for free.

Please could all personal abuse (including ***s) also be eliminated, to enable a reasoned and balanced argument?

Family cycling is high on my agenda, but MASS cycling events are souring the ground against all cycling. It is not just a 'few idiots' who are causing the problems, and not just 'nuimbies' who are against them. There do seem to be some genuine reasons for the NPA turning down the Government project, but perhaps these can be resolved, if enough good will can be shown.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously. Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route. Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?[/p][/quote]I'd appreciate it if you got your facts straight, Ginger. Wiggle's own website advertised previous events sold out at 3,000, and the Spring Sportive at 2,200. I don't know if this includes juniors riding free, but it doesn't include the large number of savvy people who choose to join in for free. Please could all personal abuse (including ***s) also be eliminated, to enable a reasoned and balanced argument? Family cycling is high on my agenda, but MASS cycling events are souring the ground against all cycling. It is not just a 'few idiots' who are causing the problems, and not just 'nuimbies' who are against them. There do seem to be some genuine reasons for the NPA turning down the Government project, but perhaps these can be resolved, if enough good will can be shown. Reconciler
  • Score: 2

4:01pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Buzzard2 wrote:
OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this.

There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem.

The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so.

The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times.

I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station.

The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile.

Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.
If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously.
Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route.
Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?
I'd appreciate it if you got your facts straight, Ginger. Wiggle's own website advertised previous events sold out at 3,000, and the Spring Sportive at 2,200. I don't know if this includes juniors riding free, but it doesn't include the large number of savvy people who choose to join in for free.

Please could all personal abuse (including ***s) also be eliminated, to enable a reasoned and balanced argument?

Family cycling is high on my agenda, but MASS cycling events are souring the ground against all cycling. It is not just a 'few idiots' who are causing the problems, and not just 'nuimbies' who are against them. There do seem to be some genuine reasons for the NPA turning down the Government project, but perhaps these can be resolved, if enough good will can be shown.
Get you OWN facts straight, that's 3,000 and 2,200 spread across multiple days for 2 seperate events, therefore, I am correct in saying that numbers are limited to what I said they were for each day of the event, it probably would include juniors too as they still have to be registered and such, those who didn't pay but joined in are the idiots we have to watch out for OR they weren't joining in at all but happened to be cycling in the same general direction, thus they only APPEAR to be joining in for nothing, well done for trying though but you failed miserably.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: OK. I haven't time to read all the twaddle written on here but will say this. There is NOT an anti-cycling sentiment in the New Forest per se. You only have to visit the 'Forest any weekend during the Summer to see the large number of families already using the bike hire businesses or using their own bikes to know this. Clearly those saying otherwise do not know the 'Forest. The recent story regarding the successful New Forest cycling club event also proves this. I too regularly and courteously cycle the 'Forest with no problem. The only objections have been against the Wiggle events and the dumping of several thousand cyclists into a delicately balanced environment . This is exacerbated by a small number who think they have to act like idiots and have such small lives that they believe they have some sort of 'right' to uphold. Martin Barden has now conceded and changed the route of the October event to accommodate the needs of the 'Forest. Did the Daily Echo report that? No, I didn't think so. The change in chairman of the NPA had nothing to do with the specific backlash against the large Wiggle events. There was no 'dumping' as this article says. If you want the correct story, read a decent paper such as the Lymington Times. I have no idea who comprises this working party but they must live in a different New Forest to me. The NPA have several recommended and safe cycle routes and, as I mentioned, there are already several booming cycle hire businesses in the 'Forest (Google 'bike hire New Forest') and I understood the only problem outstanding was a planning application to expand one of the businesses into units behind Brockenhurst railway station. The people of the 'Forest are just people such as you find anywhere else, trying to run their own local environment (just like people in Southampton do) and to claim anything else is more than a little purile. Come and visit the New Forest and see for yourselves - but perhaps not as a mass of a couple of thousand in one go.[/p][/quote]If you hug the edge of the road, that's not cycling "courtiously", that's cycling dangerously. Several thousand is a MASSIVE exhageration to the TRUE numbers that entered the wiggle rides which is LIMITED to 1500 or so on each day, they are also very well spread out along the route. Yes, it's a delicately balanced environment, so why allow mobile carbon factories to speed around the area, killing everything in sight?[/p][/quote]I'd appreciate it if you got your facts straight, Ginger. Wiggle's own website advertised previous events sold out at 3,000, and the Spring Sportive at 2,200. I don't know if this includes juniors riding free, but it doesn't include the large number of savvy people who choose to join in for free. Please could all personal abuse (including ***s) also be eliminated, to enable a reasoned and balanced argument? Family cycling is high on my agenda, but MASS cycling events are souring the ground against all cycling. It is not just a 'few idiots' who are causing the problems, and not just 'nuimbies' who are against them. There do seem to be some genuine reasons for the NPA turning down the Government project, but perhaps these can be resolved, if enough good will can be shown.[/p][/quote]Get you OWN facts straight, that's 3,000 and 2,200 spread across multiple days for 2 seperate events, therefore, I am correct in saying that numbers are limited to what I said they were for each day of the event, it probably would include juniors too as they still have to be registered and such, those who didn't pay but joined in are the idiots we have to watch out for OR they weren't joining in at all but happened to be cycling in the same general direction, thus they only APPEAR to be joining in for nothing, well done for trying though but you failed miserably. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

4:26pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Sorry, Ginger - look at the Wiggle adverts. It is 3,000 or 2,200 PER DAY.
Also, look at some cycling comment sites, where it is openly recognised that it is quite usual to join in without paying provided you don't take food from the refreshment stops.
Sorry, Ginger - look at the Wiggle adverts. It is 3,000 or 2,200 PER DAY. Also, look at some cycling comment sites, where it is openly recognised that it is quite usual to join in without paying provided you don't take food from the refreshment stops. Reconciler
  • Score: 1

4:34pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Sorry, Ginger - look at the Wiggle adverts. It is 3,000 or 2,200 PER DAY.
Also, look at some cycling comment sites, where it is openly recognised that it is quite usual to join in without paying provided you don't take food from the refreshment stops.
Even IF it's 3,000 or 2,200 per day, it does not matter, you'd get those sorts of numbers on hire bikes and their own bikes EVERY day during the summer yet nobody complains, soon as a VERY well organised event takes place with many of those SAME people, all hell breaks loose, yes they're in a more concentrated area BUT they are STILL spaced out far enough that they DON'T cause problems and as for those "forum comments", you will probably it's the same few people that do it.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: Sorry, Ginger - look at the Wiggle adverts. It is 3,000 or 2,200 PER DAY. Also, look at some cycling comment sites, where it is openly recognised that it is quite usual to join in without paying provided you don't take food from the refreshment stops.[/p][/quote]Even IF it's 3,000 or 2,200 per day, it does not matter, you'd get those sorts of numbers on hire bikes and their own bikes EVERY day during the summer yet nobody complains, soon as a VERY well organised event takes place with many of those SAME people, all hell breaks loose, yes they're in a more concentrated area BUT they are STILL spaced out far enough that they DON'T cause problems and as for those "forum comments", you will probably it's the same few people that do it. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

6:11pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again.
The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect.
I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature.
How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight.
I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again. The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect. I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature. How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight. Reconciler
  • Score: 0

7:00pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again.
The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect.
I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature.
How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight.
Here's some FACTS for you that I found from UKCE's website, the sportive, has 2 routes, both routes start at DIFFERENT times, therefore seperating many of the faster and slower riders from each other, also reducing numbers on the road at a time over BOTH routes, the longer route had a start time between 7:30AM and 8:45AM, they were released in groups, at 2 minute intervals, now, PRESUMING that an equal number of riders rode each route, so 1,500 on the short and long route, that would be 40 riders every 2 minutes, now obviously, more people will be riding the shorter route, hence the rather small window for starting, so let's say, 1,000 take the long route, that's between 26 or 27 riders every 2 minutes, by which time the previous group is long gone anyway, now the shorter route, the start time for that is between 8:30AM and 10AM with riders being released in groups at 2 minute intervals, for equal numbers of riders, that's about 33 riders in a group but as I already said, more people will be likely to join the shorter route, so let's say 2,000 riders take that route, this is about 44 riders per group at 2 minute intervals and again, by the time the next group leaves, the previous one will be long gone.
As for the toilet problem, they probably asked to be able to put portaloos in the villages where the feed stations were but most likely got refused.
As for your "thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road users", I bet most are only visitors who arrived by mobile carbon factory, throwing rubbish out of the windows as they go and I HIGHLY doubt there was a "2-mile long queue" to get into it, that would require numbers rivalling the New Forest Show to acheive such a thing.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again. The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect. I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature. How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight.[/p][/quote]Here's some FACTS for you that I found from UKCE's website, the sportive, has 2 routes, both routes start at DIFFERENT times, therefore seperating many of the faster and slower riders from each other, also reducing numbers on the road at a time over BOTH routes, the longer route had a start time between 7:30AM and 8:45AM, they were released in groups, at 2 minute intervals, now, PRESUMING that an equal number of riders rode each route, so 1,500 on the short and long route, that would be 40 riders every 2 minutes, now obviously, more people will be riding the shorter route, hence the rather small window for starting, so let's say, 1,000 take the long route, that's between 26 or 27 riders every 2 minutes, by which time the previous group is long gone anyway, now the shorter route, the start time for that is between 8:30AM and 10AM with riders being released in groups at 2 minute intervals, for equal numbers of riders, that's about 33 riders in a group but as I already said, more people will be likely to join the shorter route, so let's say 2,000 riders take that route, this is about 44 riders per group at 2 minute intervals and again, by the time the next group leaves, the previous one will be long gone. As for the toilet problem, they probably asked to be able to put portaloos in the villages where the feed stations were but most likely got refused. As for your "thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road users", I bet most are only visitors who arrived by mobile carbon factory, throwing rubbish out of the windows as they go and I HIGHLY doubt there was a "2-mile long queue" to get into it, that would require numbers rivalling the New Forest Show to acheive such a thing. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

7:05pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again.
The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect.
I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature.
How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight.
Did you also know that a LOT of the money made at these events goes towards local charities? I bet you didn't because you only see things to do with cycling in a negative way.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: I have already replied to this, but it doesn't seem to have got through, so trying again. The picture you paint of well organised, well spaced-out events, is idyllic but fanciful. In theory the participants depart in groups of 20 at 5 minute intervals. Do the maths and see how long it would take to send out 2,000+. The 2 hours or so allowed for the start are nowhere near enough, so it ends up as more or less one continuous stream, which quickly forms bunches. 'Family' cyclists are not confined to one route and do not form bunches. Yes, they can hold up traffic sometimes but nothing like so badly as the sportive riders, and Forest dwellers love to see people appreciating the special qualities of this area which we work so hard to protect. I must also disabuse you of the idea that it is just a few NIMBIES who are making their voices heard. Parish councils have thick folders of reports from hundreds of ordinary Forest road-users, and there is ample evidence that this is not an organised campaign by just a few of the types you caricature. How can you claim that the event is VERY well organised, when, for example, in its sixth year there are still not enough toilets provided? And the 2-mile long queue to get into the venue hardly shows much foresight.[/p][/quote]Did you also know that a LOT of the money made at these events goes towards local charities? I bet you didn't because you only see things to do with cycling in a negative way. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

8:30pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Did you know that, according to the Wiggle website £3,000 was to be donated to Oakhaven Hospice? Very welcome, but do you call that a LOT when contrasted with the £33 x 2,200 x 2 days =approx £120,000 in entry fees in one week end, plus a great deal of sponsorship from the likes of Garmin and money made from on site stalls. Expenses are not great, because all advertising and most booking is done online, and most marshals are volunteers. The signage is used and re-used. The donation is also rewarded with free publicity, with Mr Barden pictured shaking hands with the man from Oakhaven Hospice in local newspapers.
This is not negative, just realistic! After so many years of broken promises from Wiggle it is difficult to avoid negative-sounding comments.
Did you know that, according to the Wiggle website £3,000 was to be donated to Oakhaven Hospice? Very welcome, but do you call that a LOT when contrasted with the £33 x 2,200 x 2 days =approx £120,000 in entry fees in one week end, plus a great deal of sponsorship from the likes of Garmin and money made from on site stalls. Expenses are not great, because all advertising and most booking is done online, and most marshals are volunteers. The signage is used and re-used. The donation is also rewarded with free publicity, with Mr Barden pictured shaking hands with the man from Oakhaven Hospice in local newspapers. This is not negative, just realistic! After so many years of broken promises from Wiggle it is difficult to avoid negative-sounding comments. Reconciler
  • Score: 0

8:36pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Did you know that, according to the Wiggle website £3,000 was to be donated to Oakhaven Hospice? Very welcome, but do you call that a LOT when contrasted with the £33 x 2,200 x 2 days =approx £120,000 in entry fees in one week end, plus a great deal of sponsorship from the likes of Garmin and money made from on site stalls. Expenses are not great, because all advertising and most booking is done online, and most marshals are volunteers. The signage is used and re-used. The donation is also rewarded with free publicity, with Mr Barden pictured shaking hands with the man from Oakhaven Hospice in local newspapers.
This is not negative, just realistic! After so many years of broken promises from Wiggle it is difficult to avoid negative-sounding comments.
"Broken promises"...
Wiggle has made efforts to keep EVERY promise it has made.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: Did you know that, according to the Wiggle website £3,000 was to be donated to Oakhaven Hospice? Very welcome, but do you call that a LOT when contrasted with the £33 x 2,200 x 2 days =approx £120,000 in entry fees in one week end, plus a great deal of sponsorship from the likes of Garmin and money made from on site stalls. Expenses are not great, because all advertising and most booking is done online, and most marshals are volunteers. The signage is used and re-used. The donation is also rewarded with free publicity, with Mr Barden pictured shaking hands with the man from Oakhaven Hospice in local newspapers. This is not negative, just realistic! After so many years of broken promises from Wiggle it is difficult to avoid negative-sounding comments.[/p][/quote]"Broken promises"... Wiggle has made efforts to keep EVERY promise it has made. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

8:53pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Forgot to mention that I personally measured the length of the queue on my car odometer at about 8 am on the Saturday. It was 2 miles and rapidly growing.

The complaints received by parish councils are all signed by local residents known to the councillors. Some are willing to be identified but others request anonymity because of threats from the cycling lobby.

Permission was given for portaloos, but not enough supplied.

A great deal of the route is shared by all the riders. Do you really believe that groups of 40 every two minutes is reasonable? (This is twice the 20 promised by Wiggle and agreed by the SAG.) Mostly trying to overtake each other, so often taking up the whole width of the road? 'Every 2 minutes' doesn't mean that there are 2 minutes BETWEEN each group, so some riders swiftly catch up with those who may have left less than a minute earlier, and the jostling to overtake is continued and bunch riding starts.
Forgot to mention that I personally measured the length of the queue on my car odometer at about 8 am on the Saturday. It was 2 miles and rapidly growing. The complaints received by parish councils are all signed by local residents known to the councillors. Some are willing to be identified but others request anonymity because of threats from the cycling lobby. Permission was given for portaloos, but not enough supplied. A great deal of the route is shared by all the riders. Do you really believe that groups of 40 every two minutes is reasonable? (This is twice the 20 promised by Wiggle and agreed by the SAG.) Mostly trying to overtake each other, so often taking up the whole width of the road? 'Every 2 minutes' doesn't mean that there are 2 minutes BETWEEN each group, so some riders swiftly catch up with those who may have left less than a minute earlier, and the jostling to overtake is continued and bunch riding starts. Reconciler
  • Score: 0

8:57pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Forgot to mention that I personally measured the length of the queue on my car odometer at about 8 am on the Saturday. It was 2 miles and rapidly growing.

The complaints received by parish councils are all signed by local residents known to the councillors. Some are willing to be identified but others request anonymity because of threats from the cycling lobby.

Permission was given for portaloos, but not enough supplied.

A great deal of the route is shared by all the riders. Do you really believe that groups of 40 every two minutes is reasonable? (This is twice the 20 promised by Wiggle and agreed by the SAG.) Mostly trying to overtake each other, so often taking up the whole width of the road? 'Every 2 minutes' doesn't mean that there are 2 minutes BETWEEN each group, so some riders swiftly catch up with those who may have left less than a minute earlier, and the jostling to overtake is continued and bunch riding starts.
You do realise that Wiggle is only the main event sponsor don't you? Therefore they have no real control of anything anyway, it's down to the organisers, UKCE(a LOCAL company) to deal with these things, assuming that it's wiggle's responsibility is stupid.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: Forgot to mention that I personally measured the length of the queue on my car odometer at about 8 am on the Saturday. It was 2 miles and rapidly growing. The complaints received by parish councils are all signed by local residents known to the councillors. Some are willing to be identified but others request anonymity because of threats from the cycling lobby. Permission was given for portaloos, but not enough supplied. A great deal of the route is shared by all the riders. Do you really believe that groups of 40 every two minutes is reasonable? (This is twice the 20 promised by Wiggle and agreed by the SAG.) Mostly trying to overtake each other, so often taking up the whole width of the road? 'Every 2 minutes' doesn't mean that there are 2 minutes BETWEEN each group, so some riders swiftly catch up with those who may have left less than a minute earlier, and the jostling to overtake is continued and bunch riding starts.[/p][/quote]You do realise that Wiggle is only the main event sponsor don't you? Therefore they have no real control of anything anyway, it's down to the organisers, UKCE(a LOCAL company) to deal with these things, assuming that it's wiggle's responsibility is stupid. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

9:33pm Mon 18 Aug 14

good-gosh says...

Cycling is not common in the Forest - not rare either - but it is infrequent. So cycling is not the great popular tradition that rally enthusiasts would have us believe. They want us to swallow the argument that cycling is so common that a rally is a natural extension for the place. Not true. Normally there are more horses on the road than bicycles.
Cycling is not common in the Forest - not rare either - but it is infrequent. So cycling is not the great popular tradition that rally enthusiasts would have us believe. They want us to swallow the argument that cycling is so common that a rally is a natural extension for the place. Not true. Normally there are more horses on the road than bicycles. good-gosh
  • Score: 1

9:46am Tue 19 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Of course we know that UK Cycle Events do the organising in this area on behalf of Wiggle. which is the 'big beast' all over the country in control of these events. 'Wiggle' is the logo used in the adverts and the name that is shorthand for virtually everyone referring to the really massive events in the Forest, including all the newspapers. What's the point of quibbling about this?
There are lots of other cycling events, all of which interrupt the rhythm of life in the Forest to some extent, but which are largely well organised and considerate and accepted - and welcomed unless they cause problems by clashing with each other or other activities. An overall 'calendar' of events is sorely needed to prevent these clashes. Who, do you suggest, should pay for the work of controlling this calendar? Should all events be charged a fee in proportion to the numbers participating?

Good-gosh, I'm not convinced there are more horses than cycles on the road - but I get your point! Certainly the normal riders here to enjoy the Forest are themselves suffering because of the commercial mass events and certainly don't want the bad name they get given as a result of them.
Of course we know that UK Cycle Events do the organising in this area on behalf of Wiggle. which is the 'big beast' all over the country in control of these events. 'Wiggle' is the logo used in the adverts and the name that is shorthand for virtually everyone referring to the really massive events in the Forest, including all the newspapers. What's the point of quibbling about this? There are lots of other cycling events, all of which interrupt the rhythm of life in the Forest to some extent, but which are largely well organised and considerate and accepted - and welcomed unless they cause problems by clashing with each other or other activities. An overall 'calendar' of events is sorely needed to prevent these clashes. Who, do you suggest, should pay for the work of controlling this calendar? Should all events be charged a fee in proportion to the numbers participating? Good-gosh, I'm not convinced there are more horses than cycles on the road - but I get your point! Certainly the normal riders here to enjoy the Forest are themselves suffering because of the commercial mass events and certainly don't want the bad name they get given as a result of them. Reconciler
  • Score: 0

4:16pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Of course we know that UK Cycle Events do the organising in this area on behalf of Wiggle. which is the 'big beast' all over the country in control of these events. 'Wiggle' is the logo used in the adverts and the name that is shorthand for virtually everyone referring to the really massive events in the Forest, including all the newspapers. What's the point of quibbling about this?
There are lots of other cycling events, all of which interrupt the rhythm of life in the Forest to some extent, but which are largely well organised and considerate and accepted - and welcomed unless they cause problems by clashing with each other or other activities. An overall 'calendar' of events is sorely needed to prevent these clashes. Who, do you suggest, should pay for the work of controlling this calendar? Should all events be charged a fee in proportion to the numbers participating?

Good-gosh, I'm not convinced there are more horses than cycles on the road - but I get your point! Certainly the normal riders here to enjoy the Forest are themselves suffering because of the commercial mass events and certainly don't want the bad name they get given as a result of them.
ALL cycle events in the forest are organised by the SAME company, therefore, there is NO difference in how they're organised, it's just that a few NIMBY's have decided they don't want cyclists going through the NATIONAL park during the summer as it stops them from speeding round like loonies.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: Of course we know that UK Cycle Events do the organising in this area on behalf of Wiggle. which is the 'big beast' all over the country in control of these events. 'Wiggle' is the logo used in the adverts and the name that is shorthand for virtually everyone referring to the really massive events in the Forest, including all the newspapers. What's the point of quibbling about this? There are lots of other cycling events, all of which interrupt the rhythm of life in the Forest to some extent, but which are largely well organised and considerate and accepted - and welcomed unless they cause problems by clashing with each other or other activities. An overall 'calendar' of events is sorely needed to prevent these clashes. Who, do you suggest, should pay for the work of controlling this calendar? Should all events be charged a fee in proportion to the numbers participating? Good-gosh, I'm not convinced there are more horses than cycles on the road - but I get your point! Certainly the normal riders here to enjoy the Forest are themselves suffering because of the commercial mass events and certainly don't want the bad name they get given as a result of them.[/p][/quote]ALL cycle events in the forest are organised by the SAME company, therefore, there is NO difference in how they're organised, it's just that a few NIMBY's have decided they don't want cyclists going through the NATIONAL park during the summer as it stops them from speeding round like loonies. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

4:32pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Shows how little you know! There are all sorts of cycling events and they seem to take place every week end throughout Spring, Summer and Autumn. Charity, Race New Forest, Bike Clubs, triathlons, speed trials ............. ................
Shows how little you know! There are all sorts of cycling events and they seem to take place every week end throughout Spring, Summer and Autumn. Charity, Race New Forest, Bike Clubs, triathlons, speed trials ............. ................ Reconciler
  • Score: 1

4:39pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
Shows how little you know! There are all sorts of cycling events and they seem to take place every week end throughout Spring, Summer and Autumn. Charity, Race New Forest, Bike Clubs, triathlons, speed trials ............. ................
Oh, should have said you weren't just talking about the wiggle sponsored ones but even so, these other events still attract similar numbers and cause just as little disruption but in just the past 2 years out of the 6 that the wiggle sponsored events have been happening, suddenly there is a few people shouting off about it, probably people that have recently moved from London.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: Shows how little you know! There are all sorts of cycling events and they seem to take place every week end throughout Spring, Summer and Autumn. Charity, Race New Forest, Bike Clubs, triathlons, speed trials ............. ................[/p][/quote]Oh, should have said you weren't just talking about the wiggle sponsored ones but even so, these other events still attract similar numbers and cause just as little disruption but in just the past 2 years out of the 6 that the wiggle sponsored events have been happening, suddenly there is a few people shouting off about it, probably people that have recently moved from London. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

10:10pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants.
The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed.

Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.
None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants. The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed. Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end. Reconciler
  • Score: 1

10:15pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants.
The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed.

Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.
Sportives are NOT races, there ARE however, races held in the forest and other events DO attract similar numbers, yes a minority is ruining it for us but the commoners ARE against cycling, as shown by the fact that as a minority, they have stopped plans for putting in a bike share scheme as seen in London.
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants. The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed. Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.[/p][/quote]Sportives are NOT races, there ARE however, races held in the forest and other events DO attract similar numbers, yes a minority is ruining it for us but the commoners ARE against cycling, as shown by the fact that as a minority, they have stopped plans for putting in a bike share scheme as seen in London. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

10:17pm Tue 19 Aug 14

geoff51 says...

Reconciler wrote:
None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants.
The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed.

Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.
Hear Hear! Sense not Sentiment!
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants. The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed. Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! Sense not Sentiment! geoff51
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
Reconciler wrote:
None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants.
The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed.

Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.
Hear Hear! Sense not Sentiment!
And now the muttonhead appears.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: None of the other events overwhelm us with 2-3,000 riders. 600 causes problems but is manageable. Fairly often a couple of events clash and routes cross with sometimes quite comical confusion. The point is that RACING cycling is not an activity which promotes understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities. And don't repeat that sportives are not races - they just don't start people off all together, with technically means that they don't come under racing regulations. The attire and equipment is all for going faster, the timing is to 1000th of a second, the results are published in an alphabetical list which can easily be transformed into speed order, and incentives are offered by gold, silver and bronze standards. So all this increases the desire to 'win' - and adrenalin takes over with groups riding in bunches to draft and get up to semi-professional speeds. Indeed professionals use sportives to train. The achievements are then bragged about on cycling chat sites and the Strava website. So please forgive us if the evidence leads us to conclude that sportives are races in all but name for a large proportion of the participants. The wiggle events cause by far the greatest disruption of Forest life, and it is not just the last 2 years that this has been pointed out. This is the 6th year and Mr Barden has been made very well aware of the problems from the very beginning, with meetings and correspondence. He has promised over and over again, for instance, to provide adequate toilet facilities, yet still he can't work out that 2,200 riders require more than half a dozen at food stops. For the first time this year marshals actually managed to identify about a dozen culprits who have been banned. This should have happened 4 or 5 years ago. Proof positive that teams raced against each other within the October 2013 sportive with the winners announced has produced no reported action. Cycling chat sites are realising that the problem is growing countrywide and some reasonable riders are warning that the huge increase is going to force legislation unless the sport puts its own house in order. Please stop pretending that Wiggle events cause no problems - wake up to reality! Residents - especially the commoners who slave away at the maintenance of the landscape with their livestock - are NOT against cycling, but do feel it right to expect consideration and respect, and enforcement of the apparently wonderful regulations that Wiggle say have to be obeyed. Rant over! Thank you if you have managed to read to the end.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! Sense not Sentiment![/p][/quote]And now the muttonhead appears. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

11:03pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

When arguments fail, resort to personal abuse! Why can't we keep this discussion rational and polite?
When arguments fail, resort to personal abuse! Why can't we keep this discussion rational and polite? Reconciler
  • Score: 1

11:05pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Reconciler wrote:
When arguments fail, resort to personal abuse! Why can't we keep this discussion rational and polite?
The only arguments that fail are yours and the other FEW anti's(can count you all on 1 hand).
[quote][p][bold]Reconciler[/bold] wrote: When arguments fail, resort to personal abuse! Why can't we keep this discussion rational and polite?[/p][/quote]The only arguments that fail are yours and the other FEW anti's(can count you all on 1 hand). Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

8:54am Wed 20 Aug 14

Reconciler says...

Where do you get the idea that commoners have the power to refuse the government cycle scheme? The NPA members come from all sorts of backgrounds, including a good proportion who do not even live in the Forest. Over the past 5+ years they have realised that MASS cycling events need regulation. They have put forward very reasonable compromises which have been refused by Wiggle & co, so there is an impasse. They (and all of us) want to encourage 'ordinary' cyclists, and the several bike-hire and sale businesses, which could be put at risk by subsidised competition from 'Boris bikes'. Also, other similar schemes in the country have proved that income is not enough to cover costs. The members can now look at ways of using the money in better ways to improve cycling facilities, without risking extra expense and increased local taxes in the future.
Send a picture of your hands - thousands of fingers must be interesting!
Where do you get the idea that commoners have the power to refuse the government cycle scheme? The NPA members come from all sorts of backgrounds, including a good proportion who do not even live in the Forest. Over the past 5+ years they have realised that MASS cycling events need regulation. They have put forward very reasonable compromises which have been refused by Wiggle & co, so there is an impasse. They (and all of us) want to encourage 'ordinary' cyclists, and the several bike-hire and sale businesses, which could be put at risk by subsidised competition from 'Boris bikes'. Also, other similar schemes in the country have proved that income is not enough to cover costs. The members can now look at ways of using the money in better ways to improve cycling facilities, without risking extra expense and increased local taxes in the future. Send a picture of your hands - thousands of fingers must be interesting! Reconciler
  • Score: 0

10:45am Sun 24 Aug 14

newforestbloke says...

Also those who run the New Forest show - who charge £100 annually for membership and impose a dress code for admission to the member's enclosure announced following months of increasing criticism regarding the use of New Park to host cycling events will now no longer host any more cycling events.

It does seem that there are two seperate issues - the "Boris bike" scheme and the large scale cycling events. Not only are there several cycle hire shops, but several guest houses also have bikes for hire as well, so does the New Forest really need another bike hire scheme? I understand from the Lymington Times that the money is not going to be rejected but used for road improvements to improve saftey for all users

As for the organised cycle events a voulanrtary charter has been drawn up but because event organisers have apparently refused to cooperate regarding size and frequecy of these events local MP's are now taking the issue up with a view to legislate
Also those who run the New Forest show - who charge £100 annually for membership and impose a dress code for admission to the member's enclosure announced following months of increasing criticism regarding the use of New Park to host cycling events will now no longer host any more cycling events. It does seem that there are two seperate issues - the "Boris bike" scheme and the large scale cycling events. Not only are there several cycle hire shops, but several guest houses also have bikes for hire as well, so does the New Forest really need another bike hire scheme? I understand from the Lymington Times that the money is not going to be rejected but used for road improvements to improve saftey for all users As for the organised cycle events a voulanrtary charter has been drawn up but because event organisers have apparently refused to cooperate regarding size and frequecy of these events local MP's are now taking the issue up with a view to legislate newforestbloke
  • Score: 2

6:50pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
,,

From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth...


,,
,,

100%HANTSBOY says... What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; )


You want to waste your money on cars and have sole rights to unsustainable tarmac roads.. you're more than welcome to them..


Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighways not only pay for themselves, cyclists can be paid to use them ; ¬)



https://www.youtube.

com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp

gzU



,,
,,

South Coast Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighway.. Penzance to Dover...


Make it happen Vote Boris..


https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp
gzU



Boris for next PM


,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: ,, From Southampton.. £3.57 million would be put to better use part funding a new cycle superhighway out to the New Forest and beyond to Bournemouth... ,,[/p][/quote],, 100%HANTSBOY says... What a waste of money, cyclists don't even pay road tax! ; ) You want to waste your money on cars and have sole rights to unsustainable tarmac roads.. you're more than welcome to them.. Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighways not only pay for themselves, cyclists can be paid to use them ; ¬) https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp gzU ,,[/p][/quote],, South Coast Solar FREAKIN Cycle Superhighway.. Penzance to Dover... Make it happen Vote Boris.. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=qlTA3rnp gzU Boris for next PM ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree