Bodmin & Wenford extension plans?

All cyclists are twonks in the same manner that all railway enthusiasts are notebook toting, anorak wearing, social outcasts...
Sweeping generalisations, don't you just love 'em?

There should be room for both the Camel Trail and the BWR in several directions, but i fear the nimbys may get the last word. Shame, I speak as an annual user (and member) of the BWR, Camel Trail and Camel Valley Vineyards - all great local attractions in their own right!

 

I think at the moment the fuss is about parking in Wadebridge.

I'm no fan of Sustrans and their 'green' pretensions - most cyclists on country trails get there by 4x4 cars with bike racks - and I can't stand the smug 'holier than thou' mentality of so many cyclists who bully pedestrians just as much as they get bullied by motorists. However, on this occasion I believe they are not the problem.

John

 

[/quote]Not if S******s have anything to do with it. An completely non-democratic movement that seems to be a law unto itself.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ron.strutt/rrsustrans.html

http://onthelevelblog.wordpress.com/200 ... rporation/[/quote]

Indeed right bunch of bas****s masquerading as something they are not.

 

Re: Bodmin & Wenford extension plans

Hi,

Just to let you know the extension as it stands is still going ahead how ever progressing slowly. Our plan is now to get to nanstallon within the next 2 or 3 yrs before we get to grogley.

regards

b

 

Re: Bodmin & Wenford extension plans

For those who may be confused, he's referring to the village of Nanstallon, not the NatPres member of the same name!!

And I too deplore sweeping generalisations. SOME cyclists on tracks like the Camel Trail may act as plonkers or twonks but please don't assume that all are the same. I am both a railway enthusiast and a cyclist. My family often visit trails that were once railway tracks and the combination of great scenery, relatively easy gradients and absence of road traffic makes a good recreational day out. I would say that most other users of these tracks are responsible, considerate people. It's only the selfish minority who cause mayhem.

The same can be said for cyclists in towns who insist on riding on the pavement, expecting pedestrians (who have a right to be there) to step aside to let them pass. Or those who ride through red lights, assuming that traffic laws don't apply to them.

There are bad apples in every cartload, cyclists are no different. Motorists also.

I see no reason why cyclists and a re-instated railway cannot co-exist. It works well on the old Mangotsfield to Bath line, where a cycle track runs alongside the Avon Valley Railway for some distance. Yes, it might be a wider formation than the Camel Trail, but it can be done.

If Sustrans are being obstructive (and we haven't been told that they are in this case) we should put pressure on them.

Just my views.

John.

 

Re: Bodmin & Wenford extension plans

I should think there are a few of us on here, the amount of times Ive been on marriots way

 

Glad to read that the extension plans are advancing to Nanstallon halt rather than grinding to a halt. Although the distance between Boscarne & nanstallon must be relatively short (1/2m?), symbolically it'd be a major advance. Plus, it would bring the first stretch of the original Bodmin-Wadebridge route, probably Cornwall's most historically significant railway, back into service.

Like many others, I feel there should be an acceptable way for trail and rail to coexist on the relatively short section between Boscarne & Wadebridge. The North Cornwall trail network is now an extensive one, leaving plenty of rail-free stretches Wadebridge to Padstow, Boscarne to Wenford and north towards Camelford for users.

 

The extension to Nanstallon (if carried out cleverly) could be a useful demonstration of how a shared rail/cycle route can work, and this could help silence the critics and thereby reduce opposition to the Wadebridge goal. As with many things, if it can be shown to work in practice then thats all to the good. As the saying goes: the proof of the pudding.....

 

I think our Torbay resident has hit the nail on the head - getting to Nanstallon would be a feeler for how things would develop along the full 5 miles or so to Wadebridge. If it works then there's no reason not to press onto Wadebridge; but if it doesn't work....!

Interestingly the new Cornwall Council rather like the idea of combined rail/cycle trails, as revealed here (after the bit about Lyd).

 

The LSR website summary of the Cornwall Council plan for a Tarka-Camel link" is unclear and can be read in more than one way.
Are they REALLY proposing a combined rail/cycle trail all the way to Wadebridge?! In terms of length, that dwarfs the B&W's plan eventually to reach Wadebridge.
Or are they actually proposing a short extension of the track to Egloskerry with only a cycle trail going further on?

Even the shorter extension would be a powerful argument for the B&W if they seek Council support.

 

I read it to mean the latter: rail to Egloskerry only. The narrower gauge of the L.S.R. would make a rail + trail set-up easier to accommodate along the trackbed. The very best of luck to them: It'd be fantastic to see a four-mile stretch of the North Cornwall line operating as a railway as far as Egloskerry!

 

Returning to the original topic,
rumour has it there could be steam
in Wadebridge before the end of the year!

 

Thank you so much for the teaser, IKB. Now out with the details, please.

 

There is talk of steaming a Beattie well tank in a Wadebridge car park to mark the 175th anniversary of the B&W in September.

 

Would it link in with Egloskerry Station which markets itself as a B&B on heritage railway grounds???

 

Got it in one, let's hope it comes off.

 

...or not, as it will make wheel marks in the tarmac!

 

It'd be great if it comes off. Hopefully, those Wadebridge folk will like what they see, realise what their missing and it won't be too long before it can come back to visit by rail along the Camel valley.