Paths – fallen trees and (no) cycling

Warwick District Council who own the wood have asked that anyone coming across a newly fallen tree that is blocking a path or dangerously overhanging it to report it to them. Send them an email to with a description of where it is. Without information being provided by the public it may take time for WDC to become aware of these problems.

To help identify the location, you can make use of the maps we’ve provided on this website. A general description can be provided using the map here, but for a more precise location try using OS coordinates referring to this map. By interpolating the grid eastings and northings, you can identify accurately any point within a grid. For example, the location of the noticeboard at the main ride junction is 430550,259315, and the pond on the south ride is 430640,259020. GPS coordinates are not so useful because within the wood they may be not too accurate. Also there’s no easy way to translate GPS coordinates to our map, which is the most accurate map of the wood that is available and the only one to show the paths.

While we’re on the subject of paths, in response to a recent enquiry from a member of the public, WDC have confirmed that the designation of Oakley Wood as a Green Space means that cycling is not permitted anywhere within the wood. There are places where paths have been damaged by the construction of BMX-style ramps and obstacles. We hope this will stop. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is looking into repairing this in their winter working party activities.

9 thoughts on “Paths – fallen trees and (no) cycling”

  1. I believe that is does i.e. not allowed. Horse riding is permitted on paths designated as bridleways and there aren’t any in the wood.

  2. Cycling is permitted on footpaths unless deemed a nuisance, by the owner not members of the public. This would be a civil case and not a police matter. I would suggest that the council spend there resources on litter and fly tipping and not waste their time stopping children spending time outside on their bikes.

  3. Just because a area is designated as green space it doesn’t mean no cycling is allowed. Quite the opposite. It should be a place for everyone to enjoy this should include children riding bikes. I’ve used the wood for over 20 years and I haven’t ever seen damage caused by bikes. In fact bikes stick to tracks unlike many walkers who steer away from paths to keep their feet dry. We should be encouraging our children to ride bikes and get outdoors not put up barriers because the older generation what to keep it for them selves. Have a read https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/campaigns-guide/cycling-on-footpath-trespass

  4. We are lucky that Warwick District Council purchased the wood and thus gave us access at all. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust manages the wood as a nature reserve on behalf of WDC, and so there has to be a balance between public amenity and preservation of nature, and as owners of the wood WDC decides what that is. If they decide that cycling (and horse riding) is not allowed in the wood that’s their call, and it’s disrespectful to ignore this. If you don’t like or agree with their decisions, I would encourage you to contact WDC to let them know your views.

    I’ve no idea what, if any, lengths WDC might go to to enforce their rules, but regarding civil/police action I should point out that the “fort” in the centre of the wood is a Scheduled Monument, and damage to it (however that is defined) would constitute a criminal act, which would then be a police matter.

    However, we can certainly agree on the importance of encouraging children away from their screens and getting outdoors into a safe space to play. Personally I’m not comfortable with the conclusion that kids can’t play on their bikes in the wood because of this ban, but it’s not my call. Perhaps this is something you can mention if you communicate with the Council.

    Incidentally, I don’t think those people in WDC and WWT that decide on how the wood will be managed would be happy at being referred to as “the older generation”, and I’m pretty sure they are not wanting to “keep it for themselves”.

    1. Thank you for your reply. Its great to see that we obviously agree on several points and have a similar interest in the well being of the woodland. I will certainly be writing to the Council and will try to encourage some initiatives on how we can make the wood a more inclusive and friendly place for all.
      I fully agree that damage should not be tolerated however this is a seperate issue and should not be used to stop well behaved cyclists and horse riders using the area. If you look at other woodland areas around the country there are plenty of good examples of all three users enjoying their chosen activity and being tolerent and respectful to each other without causing damage to the enviroment. I believe as a society we need to get away from this ‘them and us‘ toxic culture and have a more emphathetic and open minded view point.
      I like the saying “be nice, say hi”. Respect works both ways and will embrace and hopefully create a far more tolerant and happy atmosphere. I also believe education is the way forward to help make people more aware of good practice and the correct etiquette when coming across other users. Historically just banning certain users never seemed to work, it only creates negativity and division because whether anyone likes it or not its never going to stop people.

      The points that I don’t quite agree with you on is firstly the point that we should be grateful to the council for purchasing the wood. We should be pleased, however the Council
      have a obligation to provide open and green spaces and in my opinion having worked in many other area’s of the country WDC are actually far behind plenty of other councils with regards to the amount of green spaces and accessible woodland we have in this county especially when you look at it on a population pro rota basis, although this is obviously a separate issue.

      The second point is that you made a negative comment about me using the term the ’older generation’. Unless you tell me otherwise I don’t know any children or teenagers who sit on WDC or WWT. I’m raising this issue and will be writing to the council on behalf the younger generation. I’m also of the older generation and take no offence by it. It’s a matter of fact, not demeaning in anyway. I believe it’s very important to have a cross repesentation of all age groups because the decisions that are made by WDC affect all age ranges older and younger, although it’s often hard for the younger generation to have a voice. Again its about being understanding and having a open mind rather than becoming defensive about a term used. Anyway, for now until we can hopefully get some positive changes moving forward, l hope everyone will “be nice and say hi“.

  5. There are many publicly and charity owned pieces of land that are multi use and shared space. Examples include Wyre Forest and Kinver Edge. They function perfectly well for the benefit of all and are not restrictive for walkers, those riding pedal bikes or horse riders. It seems that WDC’s decision is unnecessary and non-inclusive. It does nothing for their corporate and social responsibility if they choose to discriminate in this way. Green spaces should be accessible to all. Encouraging the younger generation to enjoy these spaces should be a greater priority for them than making arbitrary decisions to restrict access in the way younger people wish to enjoy them.

  6. I think this subject has been aired sufficiently now. If you weren’t previously aware, you will all be now that it is Warwick District Council who decide on whether cycling (and indeed horse riding) is allowed in the wood, and you should petition them if you feel the rules should be changed. No more comments here please.

Leave a Reply to SH Cancel reply