TRF Forums

Saturating one area with riders is not going to endear us to the locals one bit, whether or not the groups are small.

I was not happy to be given a larger group than I would normally take during last years Axe to Exe and have decided not to lead this year as I do not want to be a part of a repeat performance. Sadly the less run leaders there are the larger the group size.

The code of conduct was written for a reason and should still hold water. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater I call it when mass rides are proposed with 8 to 10 riders each group, ( 50 riders with only 5-6 run leaders does not fit in with the code of conduct does it?).

I can keep track of a group of six and know from experience how people I meet on the lanes react differently to a small group compared to a large crowd.

Mass protests are one thing but this appears to go against the code of conduct I signed up to.

Can I just clarify that the Taffy-Dakar is not run by the South Wales TRF Group.

It is being run by two individuals, one of whom happens to be a South Wales TRF Group member, but there is no connection between the T-D and the SW TRF, other than that some SW TRF members will be assisting or taking part as private individuals.

I am repeating again what myself and others have suggested - Any TRF Group that has there own website should have a "sticky" at the top of their TRF Forum page with a link to their website.

Well said

Groups of 4-6 max are the TRF ethos

We stood stand by that maxim

Whilst I tend to agree about riding in large groups not always being a good thing I think it does depend where and when the ride takes place.But the TRF code of conduct Does not make mention of group size.http://www.trf.org.uk/code-of-conduct-page-2.html

The SPTA good practice guide recommends maximum six bikes and we go to great lengths on the Wessex Wanderer and Wiltshire group runs to ensure that we do not exceed this number.

http://www.trf.org.uk/resources/useful- ... guide.html

When arranging runs that will have 12+ riders I tend to plan circular routes and send out eg 2 groups travelling the route clockwise and anti-clockwise.

Invariably there will be some newbies who can go in a 3rd group and do a different, smaller, route.

From a run leaders perspective a group of 6 is the max I would want to take out unless they were riders I knew AND it was either overseas or a quiet midweek run.

Taking 5 unknown riders out of mixed ability on lanes they haven't ridden before can be taxing!

Are we missing the point here... aren't we just trying to raise our profile nationally? There have been enough people calling for more overt action to support our cause. Saturating areas with riders is the result of lane closures limiting where we can ride. Making more people aware of our existence has to be a good thing surely?

Agree that groups need to be graded though and not of mixed abililty.
As for group size...we are on public roads after all so legally any size is ok - people are picking a fight with us so perhaps we should stop being so reasonable.

Hiding in bunker now....

DS650, I,m with you, standing at the door of your bunker waiting for the rocks to be thrown.

Ride Leaders should limit the riders to what they,re happy with, they,re leading, so its their choice and thankyou to them for taking the time to lead a ride in the first place.

If they want 3 riders max, good luck to them, they have my support.

However, keeping to small numbers because it may annoy others was a great premis and has not done us any good at all.

If we want to ride in groups of 50, we should, as long as the ride leaders are happy.

I,ve not read, seen or heard, one word of appreciation from any resident, environmentalist, rambler, councillor, or farmer, that we ride in small groups to create less annoyance, so sod em. Its time we showed the public how many there are of us, saturate and advertise I say.

I support these ideas and agree that raising our profile is of paramount importance. I liked the wearing of high vis idea and would love to see this develop. I've been saying recently we need to wear big TRF logos or something that shows who we are. The antis know who we are, but does anyone else? We need the general public to notice us, whether they are out walking, cycling, horse riding or driving along behind us between the lanes. We need to show them who we are, what we look like, and that we are very nice people of various ages and backgrounds.

However I do think the group size limit should be upheld unless certain organised events make this almost impossible. I think ten groups of six is much better than one group of sixty, or two of thirty. If I was a walker I think I would be happy to stop to let a few bikes past on a few occasions. I think I would potentially be less happy to have to stop for a few minutes to let fifty bikes past. And to me as a walker it might look inappropriate.

I'm sorry but I think that's the angle we need to look at things sometimes, for our own good. I know when things are against us after all we have done that it is tempting to think sod it, I'll just do what I want - but we all know this will only speed up lane closures. We need the neutrals and the misinformed antis on our side. They will not come and read our forum, so we need to identify ourselves out on the lanes.