Saboteurs target New Forest sportive for second time this year

I'm not sure what the rules are for Sportives. I have organised one (proper) Time Trial and I know that for that I had to:
* Put in a police permission form
* Perform a risk assessment
* Put out signs and marshalls as specified by the CTT document
* Make riders aware of rules and report any infractions

It seems that with a Sportive you can do as you please. I have heard of "proper" events (road races) being cancelled by police because a sportive (which the police can't cancel) is going through. Madness.

It's great that there are so many people out there enjoying road cycling but organisers have to let them know that tossing gel wrappers, riding 5 abreast up hills, scaring other vulnerable road users (leisure cyclists, horse riders) is not on.

It would be helpful too if the police let others know that threatening cyclists or sabotaging events is not on either.

I really don't get the attraction of a sportive. Paying to ride on otherwise free roads, with hundreds of cyclists you'll never know, and guaranteeing to cause mass inconvenience to those who the route takes you past (it does, just grow up and face it). When did planning a long ride with your mates fall out of favour? I just don't get it.

I can see these events being licensed but if they're bought under the same restrictions as road racing then it'll kill sportives - why, because of the regulation road races are mainly restricted to localised loops that are covered many times. Sportives take riders over meandering routes which explore different aspects of the country providing a more enjoyable experience for the majority of riders.

Sportive's provide interest as well as a challenge, local UK road races provide a sporting challenge but are damn boring if you're the rider dropped off the back and just doing loops until the finish line.

We caught horseriders pulling down signs on the Devon Dirt this year. When questioned they said " we don't don't think you should be riding on "our" bridleways!
At Haytor we started using flour markings as they take down the signs and riders then get lost - crazy!
Signs were also removed and some turned around on the Dartmoor Classic within 15 minutes of putting them out.

I suspect that many New Forest residents resent any group descending on "their" forest. After all, they've paid handsomely for their relative peace and quiet, and they don't want a load of "oiks" invading their privacy. And those bankers certainly don't want their trophy wives ogling a bunch of fit cyclists at close quarters, do they?

But, from a serious perspective, here are three things that event organisers could do to at least minimise confrontation.

Firstly, replace signs with proper marshalling. Signs just put peoples' backs up and, as we know, they're often removed. Better for the residents, better for the riders and better for the environment.

Secondly, you just know that handing out gels and other wrapped products, when it's clear that a fair number of those wrappers will end up on the road, will be an issue for local residents long after the riders have gone home. Organisers should minimise the problem by offering alternative bonk rations.

Thirdly, organisers shouldn't absolve themselves of blame for any anti-social rider behavour, by just stating, "remember, this is not a race". Let's face it, for many riders, this is as close as they'll ever get to actually racing for real, and that does mean that normal sensibilities tend go out of the window at times. But if organisers were a little more imaginative, perhaps with results based on a cumulative series of sensibly created Strava segments along the route (if you can afford to ride sportives then you can probably afford a "garmin"), then you can dramatically reduce potential conflict with residents and other road users at critical points along a route, because riders will not be "racing" at those critical points. At a stroke, using this concept, you could make a sportive much safer, more socially acceptable, more enjoyable for the riders (especially at feed stations) potentially far more exciting for those who want to "race", and would help neutralise the efforts any hard core saboteurs (which must be a good thing).

Sportives can be great for cycling, but we should be looking more closely at ways to reduce the potential for conflict with other road users, which ultimately affects likelyhood of sportives becoming more strictly regulated, something which, I'm sure, none of us wants to see happen.

maybe the farmer needs to be reminded who it is who pays his CAP subsidy.

I have it on good authority that the "mud on the road" due to the amount of muck was not simply as a result of a farmer in an agricultural vehicle going about their normal work, but a deliberate dumping of what must have been a large trailer load.

The sections of the highway act quoted above are intended to get farmers to keep the roads in good condition after going about their normal roles.

"but for 2 weekend a year " the problem is it's not just 2 weekends a year these days. Most weekends during the normal cycling season in the forest it seems there is an event going on, and unfortunately like most aspects of life there are a few people that don't want to obey the rules and think they're on a closed road race. I've ridden it and seen it happen and when you combine that with some very intolerant yocals (and I mean yocals) it leads to problems.

Some of the yocals don't seem to appreciate that the roads are public highways and not part of the private kingdom they that think they have either paid or inherited the right to live within.

I grew up on a farm although I am no longer a farmer, but I love my bikes (bicycles and motorbikes), its OK giving farmers a bashing here guys but lets get some reality on it.

Farmers work in muddy fields, whilst I am sure every farmer in the world would like to grow crops in clean tarmac the technology doesn't allow this as yet, so yes they do have to drive big tractors in and out of muddy fields, and just like when you walk your dog in muddy fields crap leaves the fields with them and this finds its way onto the roads.

It is not deliberate (assuming this farmer didn't do it deliberately by the way), but a farmer will travel in and out of entrances to fields dozens of times a day, its just not realistic to clean the road every time they leave a field.

I do know of farmers who have been warned when the build up of mud was excessive and dangerous, what should happen in this case is warning triangles are placed around the mud, but I don't know of one who was prosecuted as the police understand that farmers work in mud !

Sabotage is an illegal form of protest, which should be dealt with accordingly by the police

However, it clearly demonstrates strong feeling from locals - as with events in Surrey, it's quite possible there has been little consultation with those ultimately affected, beyond getting the requisite permissions.

It does sound as though there were too many participants on this occasion

There is more work to be done, by both event organisers and local authorities, to avoid disruption and ill feeling from locals.

The more this happens, the more likely a backlash against cycling, which is bad for all of us.

Yes, there will always be unreasonable people, but to simply brand them all as NIMBY's is to stifle debate and store up problems for all of us by fostering ill feeling between different road user groups.

Where were the police in all this? On their arses at the cafe having cake and coffee instead of in the saddle and patrolling the course!

What a wonderful way of demonstrating. not only dangerous but also puts everyone using the road at risk.

This was my first ever cycling event (let alone sportive) and Wiggle put on a cracking event. I did the full Epic 102miles and the new forest is amazing.

I'm a mountain biker, so have spent a lot of time in various forests around the UK and the New Forest was stunning beyond all of them and the roaming wildlife was great to be around (apart from the bulls running down the road).

I admit, at points, the cyclists took over the road and can see why they would have to close down parts of the working forest, but for 2 weekend a year to act as a massive promotional piece for the area doesn't seem like a bad trade off. I definitely will be visiting the area again and spending my money there.

Matt
(@noblematt)

With my naive hat on, I can't see a logical reason why the drift was cancelled if UK Sporting Events offered to change the date of the sportive.

Oh wait, yes I can, it's because they wanted the headline after cancelling it instead.

Oi! Commoners...it's a National Park! that means it is for all of us!!!

I'd love to hear if a farmer has ever been proecurted for muddy roads, or indeed if anyone has ever seen anyone cleaning up after tractors. It seems to be one of these laws that exists but is "idle"...

It's not just this event that has been targeted.

I'm a local and often find myself joined by others participating in new forest sportives whilst out on training rides (the more the merrier as far as i'm concerned!).

Anyway during such a training ride my tyre popped instantly due to a tact, at the side of the road whilst changing my innertube a rather fat old gentlemen in a beaten up car pulled up and expressed his delight that 'it was working'....... Interestingly he looks like the guy of the nfcda website..... Karma will ultimately balance this out i'm sure.

BUT

It's a real pity local idiots decide to target such great events that actually help local businesses and community.

Anyway they are smart enough to leave all of their contact details, so if anyone has any complaints or opinions I would contact 02380 892283.

Thanks

one road rendered impassable amid claims that a farmer deposited a layer of mud an inch and a half thick on it

Farmers (and other vehicle operatives such as construction companies) are legally obliged to clear up after themselves and are potentially liable for a range of offences. While there is a range of powers available to the police and highways department the primary powers fall under the Highways Act 1980:

Section 148 of the Highways Act 1980 makes it an offence to deposit mud etc. on the highway that would interrupt other users of the highway.

Section 149 of the Highways Act 1980 gives the highways authority the power to clean the road and recover its expenses from the person causing the obstruction.

Section 161 Highways Act 1980 “If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, deposits anything whatsoever on a highway in consequence of which a user of the highway is injured or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence”. Contravention of sections 148 and 162 can lead to a Level 3 fine of £1000 in the magistrate’s court. Furthermore if mud on the road leads to personal injury, damage to property, or any loss or inconvenience then the person responsible may be liable for damages. A conviction in the criminal court may be relied on in a claim for damages.

http://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/articles/2012/12/18/whos-liable-mud-road/

If a farmer has allowed mud to remain on a public highway that is a criminal offence.

Highways Act 1980 Section 137 “If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence”.

Highways Act 1980 Section 148 “If without lawful authority or excuse a person deposits anything whatsoever on a highway to the interruption of any user of the highway he is guilty of an offence”.

Highways Act 1980 Section 161 “If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, deposits anything whatsoever on a highway in consequence of which a user of the highway is injured or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence”.

65 animals dies in the Forest last year - all it by cars!

The Wiggle event was on this same weekend last year with no Drift clash, and the Verderers changed their date to this weekend for this year - a blatant attempt to make the event look bad!