Bosses of Wiggle New Forest 100 Sportive vow to re-route event after row with verderers about ponies

CHAIN GANG: Cyclists at last year’s Wiggle

CHAIN GANG: Cyclists at last year’s Wiggle

First published in News by , Chief Reporter

CYCLE event bosses are poised to slam the brakes on plans to send thousands of riders through the middle of a pony round-up.

They have vowed to re-route the Wiggle New Forest 100 Sportive after a stand-off with the organisation in charge of the animals.

Round-ups, known as drifts, enable experts to assess the health of each pony and are seen as a vital part of forest life.

Last year one of the drifts was cancelled to prevent it clashing with the 2013 Sportive based at New Park, Brockenhurst – home of the New Forest Show.

But the verderers are refusing to give way over a similar round-up due to be held at nearby Balmer Lawn in October.

The issue was raised at the Court of Verderers, with speakers accusing Martin Barden, director of UK Cycling Events, of ignoring a new cycling charter published by the National Park Authority.

Official verderer Dominic May said a list of all round-ups due to take place in the forest was issued in January.

He said he wrote to Mr Barden last month and asked him to alter the route of the Sportive to prevent cyclists clashing with ponies being herded along the B3055 from Balmer Lawn to Hatchet Pond.

Mr May said: “Mr Barden acknowledged that he had received our list of drift dates in January.

“He also confirmed that he will sign up to the charter as it is currently worded.

“I made it clear that the verderers will not be cancelling the Balmer Lawn drift, which is one of the most important round-ups.

“Unfortunately Mr Barden would not confirm during our discussion that he will change the route or the date.”

Peter Roberts, former chairman of the New Forest Association, added: “I think the charter should be abandoned.

“Clearly it won’t have any effect.

“He (Mr Barden) will just do what he wants.”

'ONLY FOUND OUT LAST WEEK'

SPEAKING after the meeting Mr Barden said he only found out about the potential clash last week.

He added: “We have been working hard to re-route our course to avoid the drift.

“This is not a quick job as the planning and various risk assessments take time.

“We are keen to work with the verderers to resolve this issue and hope the verderers are willing to do the same.”

Asked about the list of round-ups sent out in January Mr Barden added: “This information was issued after our event was announced and does not identify the roads that will be affected, making clashes impossible to avoid.”

Following the cancellation of last year’s drift New Forest Show bosses banned mass cycling events from their land.

As reported in the Daily Echo, the events are now based at Matchams.

Opponents of mass cycle rides through forest land have tried to sabotage at least three of the events by placing nails in the road.

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:19am Fri 20 Jun 14

Ash_69 says...

So reading the article - To prevent a clash with the pony drifts that were announced after the sportive date and with no roads actually being mentioned the cycle event organizers have vowed to re-route the course but need as much information to allow for risk assessments & planning etc of the new route..

So the groups are working to get a solution in place.

What a bunch of b*rds eh? Being helpful doesn't make good stories. However they are cyclists so that will create enough blinkered viewpoints to be thrown around, especially from the people who won't take in all the facts.
So reading the article - To prevent a clash with the pony drifts that were announced after the sportive date and with no roads actually being mentioned the cycle event organizers have vowed to re-route the course but need as much information to allow for risk assessments & planning etc of the new route.. So the groups are working to get a solution in place. What a bunch of b*rds eh? Being helpful doesn't make good stories. However they are cyclists so that will create enough blinkered viewpoints to be thrown around, especially from the people who won't take in all the facts. Ash_69
  • Score: 13

9:26am Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent? suzigirl
  • Score: -10

10:35am Fri 20 Jun 14

bourne free says...

suzigirl wrote:
You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ? bourne free
  • Score: 13

11:11am Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist
s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...
..
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... .. suzigirl
  • Score: -10

11:24am Fri 20 Jun 14

SwivelEyedLoon says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist

s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...

..
The vast majority of cyclists also own vehicles, so also pay vehicle excise duty (there's no such thing as road tax) and the cost of road improvements such as cycle lanes is as likely to come out of your council tax (which everyone pays) as from anywhere else.

To say that only a minority of cyclists are courteous is a ridiculous and unfounded generalisation and is luckily not every motorist's personal experience or opinion.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]The vast majority of cyclists also own vehicles, so also pay vehicle excise duty (there's no such thing as road tax) and the cost of road improvements such as cycle lanes is as likely to come out of your council tax (which everyone pays) as from anywhere else. To say that only a minority of cyclists are courteous is a ridiculous and unfounded generalisation and is luckily not every motorist's personal experience or opinion. SwivelEyedLoon
  • Score: 22

11:25am Fri 20 Jun 14

Franks Tank says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist

s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...

..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny. Franks Tank
  • Score: 14

11:38am Fri 20 Jun 14

bourne free says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist


s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...


..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ? bourne free
  • Score: 13

12:28pm Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right! suzigirl
  • Score: -9

12:38pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Franks Tank says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that? Franks Tank
  • Score: 7

1:04pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.
I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance. Dorset Logic
  • Score: 13

1:08pm Fri 20 Jun 14

GarrySibbald says...

Ash_69 wrote:
So reading the article - To prevent a clash with the pony drifts that were announced after the sportive date and with no roads actually being mentioned the cycle event organizers have vowed to re-route the course but need as much information to allow for risk assessments & planning etc of the new route..

So the groups are working to get a solution in place.

What a bunch of b*rds eh? Being helpful doesn't make good stories. However they are cyclists so that will create enough blinkered viewpoints to be thrown around, especially from the people who won't take in all the facts.
It didn't take long did it!
[quote][p][bold]Ash_69[/bold] wrote: So reading the article - To prevent a clash with the pony drifts that were announced after the sportive date and with no roads actually being mentioned the cycle event organizers have vowed to re-route the course but need as much information to allow for risk assessments & planning etc of the new route.. So the groups are working to get a solution in place. What a bunch of b*rds eh? Being helpful doesn't make good stories. However they are cyclists so that will create enough blinkered viewpoints to be thrown around, especially from the people who won't take in all the facts.[/p][/quote]It didn't take long did it! GarrySibbald
  • Score: 4

1:29pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Frank28 says...

A different route avoiding ponies? Does that mean the A35?
A different route avoiding ponies? Does that mean the A35? Frank28
  • Score: 6

2:10pm Fri 20 Jun 14

bourne free says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
susana - is a bit of sponsorship money for my next ride possible ?
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]susana - is a bit of sponsorship money for my next ride possible ? bourne free
  • Score: 4

2:58pm Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG suzigirl
  • Score: -7

2:59pm Fri 20 Jun 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Wrong by name, wrong by nature I would say..
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Wrong by name, wrong by nature I would say.. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 3

3:01pm Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Dorset Logic wrote:
I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.
I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead!
[quote][p][bold]Dorset Logic[/bold] wrote: I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.[/p][/quote]I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead! suzigirl
  • Score: -4

3:18pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Franks Tank says...

suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that? Franks Tank
  • Score: 2

3:23pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Franks Tank says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac. Franks Tank
  • Score: 3

3:33pm Fri 20 Jun 14

bourne free says...

suzigirl wrote:
Dorset Logic wrote:
I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.
I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead!
i like that plan a tax discount if you ride a push bike ?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dorset Logic[/bold] wrote: I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.[/p][/quote]I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead![/p][/quote]i like that plan a tax discount if you ride a push bike ? bourne free
  • Score: 5

4:18pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Isosceles says...

bourne free says i like that plan a tax discount if you ride a push bike.

I thought that the idea was to ride the bike not push it!
bourne free says i like that plan a tax discount if you ride a push bike. I thought that the idea was to ride the bike not push it! Isosceles
  • Score: 0

4:26pm Fri 20 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Franks Tank wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along!
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.[/p][/quote]Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along! suzigirl
  • Score: -9

5:41pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pete woodley says...

suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along!
Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.[/p][/quote]Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along![/p][/quote]Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public. pete woodley
  • Score: -5

8:01pm Fri 20 Jun 14

middistance says...

suzigirl wrote:
You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Why would anyone on here necessarily know about some random person doing something perfectly legal? I saw someone cross a road last week without using a crossing! perfectly legal too. What has any of it got to do with verederers saying they are doing a pony drift without actually specifying where it is. Do you think they may have timed it on purpose? To stir up trouble.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Why would anyone on here necessarily know about some random person doing something perfectly legal? I saw someone cross a road last week without using a crossing! perfectly legal too. What has any of it got to do with verederers saying they are doing a pony drift without actually specifying where it is. Do you think they may have timed it on purpose? To stir up trouble. middistance
  • Score: 1

8:11pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Arthur Maureen says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist

s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...

..
What a ridiculous and unfounded comment from the blithering ghoul that is Suzygirl.. feverishly waiting for the next cycling related comment to spout bile over, moron.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]What a ridiculous and unfounded comment from the blithering ghoul that is Suzygirl.. feverishly waiting for the next cycling related comment to spout bile over, moron. Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 3

8:13pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Arthur Maureen says...

pete woodley wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along!
Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.
Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.[/p][/quote]Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along![/p][/quote]Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.[/p][/quote]Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 5

8:56pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Dlt_debz says...

suzigirl wrote:
Dorset Logic wrote:
I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.
I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead!
just because some cyclists don't use cycle lanes doesn't mean non of us do so stop tarring us all with the same brush
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dorset Logic[/bold] wrote: I'm going to have to do more cycling if it's a route to tax avoidance.[/p][/quote]I did not say it was a route to tax avoidance. All I am saying is why is tax money wasted on cycle lanes that are not being used. The money could be used to improve the road system instead![/p][/quote]just because some cyclists don't use cycle lanes doesn't mean non of us do so stop tarring us all with the same brush Dlt_debz
  • Score: 3

9:12pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Ayles 10 says...

Quite frankly, the cyclists I see on a regular basis in this area have no regard for anyone else on the road. They are rude, ignorant & pathetic examples of the human race with no respect to the livestock, pedestrians or anything else they may come across during their 'time trials'.
Quite frankly, the cyclists I see on a regular basis in this area have no regard for anyone else on the road. They are rude, ignorant & pathetic examples of the human race with no respect to the livestock, pedestrians or anything else they may come across during their 'time trials'. Ayles 10
  • Score: -5

9:20pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Mandysotherhalf says...

Going to get thee muck spreader out. Mass cycling events in New Forest National Park - need to be banned.
Going to get thee muck spreader out. Mass cycling events in New Forest National Park - need to be banned. Mandysotherhalf
  • Score: -4

9:27pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pete woodley says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along!
Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.
Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur
I would like to discuss face to face with the fool,but you wont face me,coward.
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.[/p][/quote]Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along![/p][/quote]Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.[/p][/quote]Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur[/p][/quote]I would like to discuss face to face with the fool,but you wont face me,coward. pete woodley
  • Score: -4

9:28pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pete woodley says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..
"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.
well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?
Face bothered. You can't even get my name right!
Heather Busst - how about that?
WRONG
Are you sure about that?
Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.
Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along!
Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.
Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur
I would like to discuss face to face with the fool,but you wont face me,coward.
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]"Us taxpayers" - you're such a joke it's not funny.[/p][/quote]well now susana ,looks like your on your own here ?[/p][/quote]Face bothered. You can't even get my name right![/p][/quote]Heather Busst - how about that?[/p][/quote]WRONG[/p][/quote]Are you sure about that?[/p][/quote]Sorry, you're right, ment Heather Isaac.[/p][/quote]Did you mean "meant" - oh dear! Now be a good little boy and run along![/p][/quote]Suzi,Get used to it, i do,as if anonymous cowards are in any way worth bothering with,they only do it on here as they would not face anyone in public.[/p][/quote]Your in the same asylum as suzygirl, why don't you discuss face to face with the fool rather than on here. Arthur[/p][/quote]I would like to discuss face to face with the fool,but you wont face me,coward. pete woodley
  • Score: 0

10:04pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Thepinkhouse says...

Whoa people, let's get a perspective here, things could be worse....dogs running amok, teenagers having a shandy, Jeremy Kyle recording his latest show. It is only a cycle race. Lets hope the ponies behave themselves
Whoa people, let's get a perspective here, things could be worse....dogs running amok, teenagers having a shandy, Jeremy Kyle recording his latest show. It is only a cycle race. Lets hope the ponies behave themselves Thepinkhouse
  • Score: 3

11:44pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pantster says...

I don't think these type of comments do either side any favours. I'm a local resident and also a cyclist. As some have pointed out some locals like to claim ownership of the new forest. Ease try and remember that national forests/parks are designated as such for EVERYONE to enjoy. I think it's fair to say those who get to use it regularly on horses get 'more then their money's worth', excuse the term but I think many locals enjoy a disproportionate amount of use from these parks - WHICH ARE EVERYONES TO ENJOY. Sure their will be clashes of use and these need to be carefully managed
What does not help is name calling or (& I use this word deliberately) IDIOTS who decide to try and disrupt these rides by throwing nails in the road. We know of at least one cyclist, nothing to do with the wiggle ride, that was injured by these actions. These people should be arrested.

The best thing that should happen is for FACTS to be looked at in situations like this. I have to say the Echo doesn't help by sensationalising these matters, peoples safety is at stake when people try and disrupt these events as described and headlines such as 'row' is not helpful. The organiser of these rides has said that he doesn't understand how at the beginning of the week they agree to look at changing the route and later the same week the verderers say he is being uncooperative. These cyclists would not want to cycle near herded horses as much as the verderers don't want them there
I don't think these type of comments do either side any favours. I'm a local resident and also a cyclist. As some have pointed out some locals like to claim ownership of the new forest. Ease try and remember that national forests/parks are designated as such for EVERYONE to enjoy. I think it's fair to say those who get to use it regularly on horses get 'more then their money's worth', excuse the term but I think many locals enjoy a disproportionate amount of use from these parks - WHICH ARE EVERYONES TO ENJOY. Sure their will be clashes of use and these need to be carefully managed What does not help is name calling or (& I use this word deliberately) IDIOTS who decide to try and disrupt these rides by throwing nails in the road. We know of at least one cyclist, nothing to do with the wiggle ride, that was injured by these actions. These people should be arrested. The best thing that should happen is for FACTS to be looked at in situations like this. I have to say the Echo doesn't help by sensationalising these matters, peoples safety is at stake when people try and disrupt these events as described and headlines such as 'row' is not helpful. The organiser of these rides has said that he doesn't understand how at the beginning of the week they agree to look at changing the route and later the same week the verderers say he is being uncooperative. These cyclists would not want to cycle near herded horses as much as the verderers don't want them there pantster
  • Score: 5

11:49pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pantster says...

Look at the timeline and decide logically

Wiggle (actually UKCE) announce the date and route in Octobers 2013

Verderers announce the will be driving in January 2014 but don't announce where

Last few weeks they meet to sort this out. What would you do when you announce when and where you'd like to cycle then afterwards someone says they have a drive planned same time but won't announce where (I understand they have reasons why they choose not to announce where). How would you plan a route or reroute? Remember the organisers have to check the route and do safer assessments for it
Look at the timeline and decide logically Wiggle (actually UKCE) announce the date and route in Octobers 2013 Verderers announce the will be driving in January 2014 but don't announce where Last few weeks they meet to sort this out. What would you do when you announce when and where you'd like to cycle then afterwards someone says they have a drive planned same time but won't announce where (I understand they have reasons why they choose not to announce where). How would you plan a route or reroute? Remember the organisers have to check the route and do safer assessments for it pantster
  • Score: 3

11:54pm Fri 20 Jun 14

pantster says...

suzigirl wrote:
You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
As I said deal in facts. If you actually look at that photo there is no one cycling more than two abreast, it's the angle that makes it look worse than that.
I'm sure you're aware of the Highway Code on this but the rules for cyclists refer to 'should' is should wear a helmet, not compulsory but should. ie shouldn't ride more than two abreast.

They're actually being marshalled away from a junction in the photo.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]As I said deal in facts. If you actually look at that photo there is no one cycling more than two abreast, it's the angle that makes it look worse than that. I'm sure you're aware of the Highway Code on this but the rules for cyclists refer to 'should' is should wear a helmet, not compulsory but should. ie shouldn't ride more than two abreast. They're actually being marshalled away from a junction in the photo. pantster
  • Score: 9

12:02am Sat 21 Jun 14

pantster says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist

s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...

..
Absolute drivel I'm afraid, where do you even start??
As said there no such thing as road tax, it's VED based on engine size or on fuel type and carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) emissions of the vehicle - hence bicycles pay none
However, statistically cyclists tend to be slightly more affluent and a higher percentage of cyclists own cars than the general population so statistically they are more likely to pay VED than the general public. By your argument they have more 'right' to the roads than non-cyclists!!

As for 'courteousness', just rubbish again, you get good and bad cyclists and drivers. Drivers tend to get held up by cyclists and so remember it more, I would say I get annoyed far more often by other drivers than cyclists day to day but we don't like to remember that
Btw I use the terms drivers and cyclists loosely as most cyclists tend to be drivers as well!
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]Absolute drivel I'm afraid, where do you even start?? As said there no such thing as road tax, it's VED based on engine size or on fuel type and carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) emissions of the vehicle - hence bicycles pay none However, statistically cyclists tend to be slightly more affluent and a higher percentage of cyclists own cars than the general population so statistically they are more likely to pay VED than the general public. By your argument they have more 'right' to the roads than non-cyclists!! As for 'courteousness', just rubbish again, you get good and bad cyclists and drivers. Drivers tend to get held up by cyclists and so remember it more, I would say I get annoyed far more often by other drivers than cyclists day to day but we don't like to remember that Btw I use the terms drivers and cyclists loosely as most cyclists tend to be drivers as well! pantster
  • Score: 9

12:08am Sat 21 Jun 14

pantster says...

suzigirl wrote:
bourne free wrote:
suzigirl wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?
Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?
You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist

s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians...

..
Ps - cycle lanes (Highway Code)
"Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer."

Unfortunately although our taxes are used for these , basically a bit of paint on the road rather than a segregated lane, these are mostly poor and stop and start, they are placed on the side of the road where potholes, drains, rubbish, broken glass/car parts tend to be. This makes them a less safe place to ride in many locations.

I can assure you I'd prefer not to fall off in front of you on the road and believe me you'd prefer it that I stayed on my bike rather than ride in the cycle lane, hit a poorly tarmacced drain and fall infront of you upon which you are too close behind and subsequently hit me. It would be a bad day for both of us!
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: You will never be able to reason with these type of cyclists I am afraid - law onto themselves as you can see from the picture riding 3-4 abreast. Can anyone please tell me why there was a cyclist on the Dorset Way on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane adjacent?[/p][/quote]Could you give a better description of this cyclist and if possible some exact times and i can try to find out who it was for you ! ?[/p][/quote]You probably know him judging from your comment or is it you?! Us taxpayers have to fork out for all these "cycle lanes" and the cyclists don't use them and then they keep banging on about being "vulnerable" on the road and criticising all us nasty car drivers.......... The majority of car drivers/motorcyclist s are courteous on the road to cyclists but only a minority of cyclists are courteous to other road users/pedestrians... ..[/p][/quote]Ps - cycle lanes (Highway Code) "Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer." Unfortunately although our taxes are used for these , basically a bit of paint on the road rather than a segregated lane, these are mostly poor and stop and start, they are placed on the side of the road where potholes, drains, rubbish, broken glass/car parts tend to be. This makes them a less safe place to ride in many locations. I can assure you I'd prefer not to fall off in front of you on the road and believe me you'd prefer it that I stayed on my bike rather than ride in the cycle lane, hit a poorly tarmacced drain and fall infront of you upon which you are too close behind and subsequently hit me. It would be a bad day for both of us! pantster
  • Score: 4

12:12am Sat 21 Jun 14

pantster says...

Thepinkhouse wrote:
Whoa people, let's get a perspective here, things could be worse....dogs running amok, teenagers having a shandy, Jeremy Kyle recording his latest show. It is only a cycle race. Lets hope the ponies behave themselves
They are not races, there is no competition, no prize giving, no leaderboard
[quote][p][bold]Thepinkhouse[/bold] wrote: Whoa people, let's get a perspective here, things could be worse....dogs running amok, teenagers having a shandy, Jeremy Kyle recording his latest show. It is only a cycle race. Lets hope the ponies behave themselves[/p][/quote]They are not races, there is no competition, no prize giving, no leaderboard pantster
  • Score: 1

12:18am Sat 21 Jun 14

pantster says...

Guys and gals

I felt compelled to write on here after reading some of the unfounded drivel that is put out as truths to justify a viewpoint

Deal in facts, no name calling because it does no one any favours. There are views on each side, I had a friend seriously injured after coming off his bike. He hit a patch of horse droppings on a bend in the road, should we label all horse riders dangerous and have them banned from busier roads? No, so let's be sensible.

-the parks are everyone's to enjoy
- there has been a code of conduct agreed by both 'sides' and it is being stuck to
Guys and gals I felt compelled to write on here after reading some of the unfounded drivel that is put out as truths to justify a viewpoint Deal in facts, no name calling because it does no one any favours. There are views on each side, I had a friend seriously injured after coming off his bike. He hit a patch of horse droppings on a bend in the road, should we label all horse riders dangerous and have them banned from busier roads? No, so let's be sensible. -the parks are everyone's to enjoy - there has been a code of conduct agreed by both 'sides' and it is being stuck to pantster
  • Score: 5

2:36am Sat 21 Jun 14

ashleycross says...

Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest.
Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely.
Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest. Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely. ashleycross
  • Score: -4

3:02am Sat 21 Jun 14

Wageslave says...

ashleycross wrote:
Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest.
Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely.
Do the verderers not still have ancient rights to what happens in the forest and uphold the old rules. In a clash between the drift and the cyclists, the cyclists would come a very poor second
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest. Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely.[/p][/quote]Do the verderers not still have ancient rights to what happens in the forest and uphold the old rules. In a clash between the drift and the cyclists, the cyclists would come a very poor second Wageslave
  • Score: -4

4:23am Sat 21 Jun 14

Ginny nz says...

Good . The ponies live and have the right to go where they please on he forest . Go WIGGLE elsewhere!!
Good . The ponies live and have the right to go where they please on he forest . Go WIGGLE elsewhere!! Ginny nz
  • Score: -3

7:48am Sat 21 Jun 14

folkprotector says...

Cyclists, if there's a cycle lane and especially if there's a cycle path, use it! You know it makes sense.
Cyclists, if there's a cycle lane and especially if there's a cycle path, use it! You know it makes sense. folkprotector
  • Score: 0

9:32am Sun 22 Jun 14

newforestbloke says...

pantster wrote:
Look at the timeline and decide logically

Wiggle (actually UKCE) announce the date and route in Octobers 2013

Verderers announce the will be driving in January 2014 but don't announce where

Last few weeks they meet to sort this out. What would you do when you announce when and where you'd like to cycle then afterwards someone says they have a drive planned same time but won't announce where (I understand they have reasons why they choose not to announce where). How would you plan a route or reroute? Remember the organisers have to check the route and do safer assessments for it
perhaps some facts rearding what a drift is

Quote

Drifts List Quote :-

"The Verderers have taken the decision to remove the annual drift list dates from this website.

In recent years, more and more members of the general public have been attending the drifts but unfortunately, the ever increasing number of spectators is causing disruption and is interfering with the management of the drifts. If the number of spectators continues to increase, the drifts may well be in jeopardy. The official pony drifts are an essential part of the management of the semi-feral herd and their loss would seriously compromise the health and welfare of the ponies on the Forest.

The drifts are not a spectator sport and unfortunately for the reasons stated above, the Verderers now have no option but to strongly discourage the public from attending. Your co-operation in staying away from the drifts will be greatly appreciated." End of quote.

The Verders do in fact have legal rights to organise drifts as they see fiut as to the management of the Forest and the welfare of the animals. Do I have to state the obvious as out comes the claim that this is being done deliberately to stir up anti cycling
[quote][p][bold]pantster[/bold] wrote: Look at the timeline and decide logically Wiggle (actually UKCE) announce the date and route in Octobers 2013 Verderers announce the will be driving in January 2014 but don't announce where Last few weeks they meet to sort this out. What would you do when you announce when and where you'd like to cycle then afterwards someone says they have a drive planned same time but won't announce where (I understand they have reasons why they choose not to announce where). How would you plan a route or reroute? Remember the organisers have to check the route and do safer assessments for it[/p][/quote]perhaps some facts rearding what a drift is Quote Drifts List Quote :- "The Verderers have taken the decision to remove the annual drift list dates from this website. In recent years, more and more members of the general public have been attending the drifts but unfortunately, the ever increasing number of spectators is causing disruption and is interfering with the management of the drifts. If the number of spectators continues to increase, the drifts may well be in jeopardy. The official pony drifts are an essential part of the management of the semi-feral herd and their loss would seriously compromise the health and welfare of the ponies on the Forest. The drifts are not a spectator sport and unfortunately for the reasons stated above, the Verderers now have no option but to strongly discourage the public from attending. Your co-operation in staying away from the drifts will be greatly appreciated." End of quote. The Verders do in fact have legal rights to organise drifts as they see fiut as to the management of the Forest and the welfare of the animals. Do I have to state the obvious as out comes the claim that this is being done deliberately to stir up anti cycling newforestbloke
  • Score: 5

11:30am Sun 22 Jun 14

newforestbloke says...

ashleycross wrote:
Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest.
Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely.
spot on apart from the "amusement park" bit which will be quoterd as "New Forest NIMBY"

The New Forest is unique and the smallest and most densly populated of all the national parks. It has byt far the largest number of free ranging animals, nearly 4,000 ponies alone compared to Dartmoor's 800 - 1000.

These animals are described as the architects of the New Forest because it does not just exist but is managed. Cancellation of one drift will not be the end of the world, but as ever increasing numbers and size of events being held here and the precedent that drifts and other activities on the Forest are put on hoild for the latest cycle event will ultimaterly destroy it

If any group is being "selfish" and trying to stop others enjoying
the "peoples" New Forest it is these events
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: Interfering with the drift would be unforgivable. I don't care about bikes getting in the way of cars but do mind the drift being disrupted. absolutely ridiculous to have an event for bikes at the same time as the drift. It would never have been allowed before the New Forest became a national park, aka amusement park for Londoners who have no respect for the ponies or any other aspect of the forest. Before it became a national park the verderers wouldn't have been intimidated out of making orders in their own court against a cycle event taking place at the same time as a drift. They still could, if they weren't frighted by the fear of the national parks authority disbanding them completely.[/p][/quote]spot on apart from the "amusement park" bit which will be quoterd as "New Forest NIMBY" The New Forest is unique and the smallest and most densly populated of all the national parks. It has byt far the largest number of free ranging animals, nearly 4,000 ponies alone compared to Dartmoor's 800 - 1000. These animals are described as the architects of the New Forest because it does not just exist but is managed. Cancellation of one drift will not be the end of the world, but as ever increasing numbers and size of events being held here and the precedent that drifts and other activities on the Forest are put on hoild for the latest cycle event will ultimaterly destroy it If any group is being "selfish" and trying to stop others enjoying the "peoples" New Forest it is these events newforestbloke
  • Score: -7

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