OPINION: Clew Bay Bike Trail hopes blighted by dishonesty, arrogance and poisonous debate

I was canvassed last week by an aspirant TD from one of the government parties. Our cottage is on the slopes of Croagh Patrick, close to the exit of the controversial proposed TII/Mayo County Council cycle track on the mountainside.

The canvassers had failed to notice my protest placard at the gate, and when I raised the matter, claimed that this was a local issue whereas their candidate was running for national office. Presumably, they thought the line of similar placards all along the road from Belclare to Murrisk to be equally irrelevant.

To say that the debate about the cycle track on the mountainside versus a track along the road from Westport to Murrisk has been poisonous is an understatement.

Initial survey

A national agency, Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), and the executive of Mayo County Council (MCC) are pushing for the construction of a tarmac-surfaced road through the Belclare Owenwee River Valley and through pristine oak woods and over slopes of Croagh Patrick, through the old Murrisk Deer Park.

Construction is not the whole story. Also involved is the destruction of an area of great natural beauty and ecological importance when an alternative roadside track would be feasible, cheaper and environmentally friendlier.

For many years, there has been discussion about the desirability of a cycle track that circled Clew Bay, starting at Westport, proceeding along the south side of the bay through Murrisk, Lecanvey, Louisburgh and ending at the ferry harbour at Roonagh. From there, ferries could bring cyclists to Clare Island, itself a wonderful place to explore, and afterwards another ferry would take them to Darby’s Point on Achill Island.

A track from Darby’s Point to Achill Sound (one location of the financial malfeasance of MCC back in 2022) then connects cyclists to the existing magnificent greenway on the abandoned rail track linking the Sound to Mulranny, Newport and home to Westport.

A challenging and spectacular round trip of 105km. An attraction of European significance.

A freedom of information (FOI) request disclosed that MCC obtained initial funding for the Clew Bay cycle track in 2020 and carried out a very detailed survey (a Digital Terrain Model) of the initial roadside route from Westport to Murrisk. The survey concluded that bringing the existing R335 hard-shoulder cycle track to a safe standard would be feasible and could be constructed with limited impact on local roadside properties.

Screeching halt

Two events brought progress on this project to a screeching halt. Firstly, very serious financial malfeasance was uncovered in MCC that resulted in the Government confiscating the allocated funding. Second, the Covid-19 lockdown brought all construction activity to a standstill.

When the Westport-Murrisk cycle track project resurfaced in 2023 it had mutated into a TII gold-plated “greenway” that MCC now claims could not be placed along the existing road without massive expense.

Documents recently issued by the Mayo National Roads Office costed the mountain track at €6.5 million and the roadside track at €14 million. It is claimed that a roadside track would require eight houses and seven sheds be demolished versus zero for the mountain route. Also, 29 driveways and 2,272 boundary walls would have to be demolished and rebuilt, versus two and 200, respectively, for the mountainside option.

These claims are shockingly misleading and false, because there is no need for the roadside greenway to be gold plated. The copper-plated design initially made by MCC would be safe and fit the bill perfectly.

Earlier in November, I was told by MCC that: “In response to FOI 2421 I confirm that Mayo County Council has not applied for any departures from standards in relation to the Belclare to Murrisk Greenway.”

Badly served

It is very clear what is going on here.

The Council initially acquired funding for the roadside cycle track but had to return it to the Department of Community and Rural Affairs because of its questionable administration of those funds. It must have seemed as though nobody would ever trust MCC with funding again, but TII was prepared to do so, at a price – the price being environmental degradation.

Mayo County Council could have sought modifications to the TII greenway design standard to facilitate construction along the roadside. In their eagerness to put the track on the mountainside, they never explored the possibility of modest departures from the TII standards to enable a safe and inexpensive cycle track to be built along the roadside.

This behaviour flies in the face of MCC’s original 2020 plans, which included an improved road-segregated greenway from Belclare to Murrisk and widening of the R335 at any pinch-point locations to around three metres. Having cycled the roadside route, I have seen for myself that there are few enough pinch points, they could be easily addressed, the land is already in public ownership, and no houses or sheds would have to be demolished.

Meanwhile, the rest of the Clew Bay cycle track remains in abeyance. If this is a local issue and not a national issue, as claimed by my aspirant TD visitor, who then will protect us from the dishonest, misleading and arrogant behaviour of a County Council Executive that is so strapped for cash that it recently announced that all hedge cutting would terminate due to lack of finance?

The people of Mayo are badly served by a Council Executive that prefers to hide its real intentions and motivations behind barriers of secrecy, has a confrontational relationship with our elected Councillors, and has already admitted to drawing down funds without incurring the requisite expenditure, leaving a trail of miscoded invoices.