What All Mountain Bikers Should Know

[bianchi1]

If the entirety of the OP was merely the title your analysis would be fine, but instead we have a sermon preaching. Urging a change in behaviour. People must comply with the law and thus avoid conflict and disrespecting the memories of those who went before us. And in a cycling forum not renowned as a hive of mtb related activity a sermon preached to the converted.

I've no problem with the factual content, just the preachy tone and the BS about trail centre users.

Fair point.

Recently a member of the local Malvern MTB club raised the idea of a fixed code of conduct to be worked out for riding on the hills, but it was roundly dismissed as it was felt that as soon as rules are set in stone, someone will break them and in the end all biking will be banned.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Surely the only code we need is something like

1. Treat others and their wishes and their property respectfully, as the valuable fragile things they are, and as you would like to be treated yourself
2. Tread lighlty, leave no trace, and do no harm
3. Ride where you like, when in doubt see 1

 

[bianchi1]

Surely the only code we need is something like

1. Treat others and their wishes and their property respectfully, as the valuable fragile things they are, and as you would like to be treated yourself
2. Tread lighlty, leave no trace, and do no harm
3. Ride where you like, when in doubt see 1

Sadly, number 2 is often argued as a reason why cyclists should not use the hills. There is an argument (not clearly proven) that mountain bikers, especially on turns, cause damage to the paths. There may also be an argument that in order to do no harm, cyclists should be restricted during lambing season as they unwittingly cause distress to the sheep.

Leave no trace is a hugely important movement in the outdoor industry, especially in the US. It can however lead to high levels of restrictions, both in numbers and type of usage. I personally like the fact that on some trails/climbs you have to pick up a personal toilet tube in order that you really leave no trace!

 

[Crackle]

Sadly, number 2 is often argued as a reason why cyclists should not use the hills. There is an argument (not clearly proven) that mountain bikers, especially on turns, cause damage to the paths.

This was an argument in the 90's, is it really still one, I've not seen it recently as I thought it was largely discredited. Bike tracks quickly get covered, by far the greater damage and wear is done by walkers.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Sadly, number 2 is often argued as a reason why cyclists should not use the hills. There is an argument (not clearly proven) that mountain bikers, especially on turns, cause damage to the paths. There may also be an argument that in order to do no harm, cyclists should be restricted during lambing season as they unwittingly cause distress to the sheep.

Leave no trace is a hugely important movement in the outdoor industry, especially in the US. It can however lead to high levels of restrictions, both in numbers and type of usage. I personally like the fact that on some trails/climbs you have to pick up a personal toilet tube in order that you really leave no trace!

undoubtedly riding mtb's leaves a trace, and causes erosion, as does riding horses, as do walkers. Is the trace significant? It can well be if a trail is overused but any one individual riding responsibly is not responsible for the collective damage surely? 'Rule' 1 overrides all the others. Respect the trail or one day it won't be there any more.

I'm fine with no riding in certain areas during lambing btw provided someone can show me the evidence/data of sheep stress rather than merely expressing landowner 'geroffmoyland' stress which exists, in some, all year round ime.

 

[bianchi1]

This was an argument in the 90's, is it really still one, I've not seen it recently as I thought it was largely discredited. Bike tracks quickly get covered, by far the greater damage and wear is done by walkers.

It is around here, although you could argue that the malvens are stuck in the 1890's let alone the 1990's. The argument is coming back into favour with a wider audience also however. As numbers increase so the damage becomes more noticeable. Hard breaking points, tight corners and steep inclines that cause wheel spin are all highlighted as problem areas. Sadly, often bike tracks are not covered. An observable phenomenon is the creation of unofficial paths where repeated use (by walkers, cyclists of horse riders) will wear down the grass leaving a mundy path..this then becomes too muddy, exposed roots or rocky and people will ride/walk either side of the 'path' causing even more damage.

I must be clear that I find a lot of these arguments over simplistic, and any increased legislation would not be the answer in my opinion. I much prefer the model of providing amazing facilities specifically for trail riding or downhill (think uplift, tracks, jumps, cafe's, bars etc) that act as a 'honey pot'.

 

[bianchi1]

undoubtedly riding mtb's leaves a trace, and causes erosion, as does riding horses, as do walkers. Is the trace significant? It can well be if a trail is overused but any one individual riding responsibly is not responsible for the collective damage surely? 'Rule' 1 overrides all the others. Respect the trail or one day it won't be there any more.

I'm fine with no riding in certain areas during lambing btw provided someone can show me the evidence/data of sheep stress rather than merely expressing landowner 'geroffmoyland' stress which exists, in some, all year round ime.

We have a huge amount of common land around me so it's not about "geroffmoyland". Sheep are a real danger in some of our clubs road time trials!

 

[Motozulu]

I'm fine with no riding in certain areas during lambing btw provided someone can show me the evidence/data of sheep stress

I can clear this up. Having come from a background of animal husbandry let me tell you that the damage to a sheeps psyche can be devastating and long term. I can illustrate this.

A healthy, happy, sheep.

A sheep suffering from severe stress.

As you can see the effects are quite horrific. However there is a way that sheep can be integrated with bikers and made to feel non-threatened by our off-road activities.

HTH.

 

[chqshaitan]

I can clear this up. Having come from a background of animal husbandry let me tell you that the damage to a sheeps psyche can be devastating and long term. I can illustrate this.

A healthy, happy, sheep.

A sheep suffering from severe stress.

As you can see the effects are quite horrific. However there is a way that sheep can be integrated with bikers and made to feel non-threatened by our off-road activities.

HTH.

haha, class, that made me laugh lol

 

[Licramite]

In the last year allot of of road cycle tracks and walking routes have been closed since the (previuos) goverment brought in the act that if a trackway was used for 20years it became a public right of way and the land owner who had allowed it , out of courtsy, couldn't close it and had to maintain it. - so they closed them.
I've lost two routes route my way.
Of course the conflict between walkers and bicycles continues, (and deer and sheep). - to great extent I blame the cyclists , you don't have right of way so you should slow down near other track users. - big row about a new route near plymouth, the sustrans route we want to use runs downhill and the locals have objected about the possible increase in cyclists.

did you see the clip on the internet, american off roader on some race got taken out by a young deer, - it's also happened to me. - stupid thing waited till I was practically passing it when it decided, if I go left I run across open fields, but if I go right I cross the road take out his front wheel, jump a hedge and run up hill away.
- so I'm lying on the road watching this deer running up a hill.

 

[bianchi1]

It looks like sheep hate walkers far more more that cyclists.

"Another study evaluated the behavioral responses of desert bighorn sheep to disturbance by hikers, mountain bikers, and vehicles in low- and high-use areas of Canyonlands National Park (Papouchis and others., 2001). Following observations of 1,029 bighorn sheep/human interactions, the authors reported that sheep fled 61 percent of the time from hikers, 17 percent of the time from vehicles, and 6 percent of the time from mountain bikers. The stronger reaction to hikers, particularly in the high-use area, was attributed to more off-trail hiking and direct approaches to the sheep. The researchers recommended that park officials restrict recreational uses to trails, particularly during the lambing and rut seasons, in order to minimize disturbance."

 

[GrumpyGregry]

On the south downs and hereabouts herds of deer run away from walkers but often just stand and watch cyclists

 

[Deleted member 23692]

In the last year allot of of road cycle tracks and walking routes have been closed since the (previuos) goverment brought in the act that if a trackway was used for 20years it became a public right of way and the land owner who had allowed it , out of courtsy, couldn't close it and had to maintain it. - so they closed them.

I'm really not sure which Act you're referring to here, but the only major change to PRoW's legislation (CRoW 2000) that the last gov brought in was setting a deadline for getting unrecorded historical rights of way (existing before 1949) added to the definitive map at 2026.

The Wilfdlife and Countryside Act 1980 still enables post 1949 usage to be claimed by the public if that usage if brought into question. If the public can demonstrate 20years uninterrupted usage there is a good chance the route can be added to the definitive map by modification order.

Also the CRoW 2000 introduced the Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) where the public can summit ideas to highway/access authorities whereby the network can be brought up to date for modern (predominantly recreational) usage instead of the historical utility network we were gifted in the 1950s. Might be worth checking out locally

I do much of the above for a living and have enough work to keep my busy for a good few years yet. Unfortunately PRoW legislation is complicated and contradictory which means nothing gets done quickly, and when budget cuts come round countryside access is always an easy target.

One final point on bikes causing erosion - yes they do but in a different way to feet & hoof. A wheel rolling over a surface disturbs very little, however the rut in can create on soft sloping ground creates a runnel which can channels and increase the speed of water runoff causing increased washout. Foot and hoof tend to create pockets in soft ground which retains and pools the water softening the ground - continued use just creates mud. That's a very simplistic explanation as there are plenty of other site specific factors causing wear. Additionally, locking the back wheel whilst breaking can rip a line in an otherwise solid weather resistant surface - this lets water in and can start eroding on an otherwise good surface.

Anyhoo, tis the weekend and I left all this on a desk 'til Monday

 

[tadpole]

This was an argument in the 90's, is it really still one, I've not seen it recently as I thought it was largely discredited. Bike tracks quickly get covered, by far the greater damage and wear is done by walkers.

Walkers rarely chop down trees or dig up and transport rocks to make jumps and tracks, nor do they set fire to mature trees or attempt to fell them as they "are in the way of a new downhill"

 

[02GF74]

This was an argument in the 90's, is it really still one, I've not seen it recently as I thought it was largely discredited. Bike tracks quickly get covered, by far the greater damage and wear is done by walkers.

so what? what is the point of there being countryside if you cannot use it? conveniently those that argue against bikes or walkers or horses or whatever damagaing the countryside kinda fail to mention the amount of damage i.e. diappearance of it by building, houses, roads and takeaways.

i am not syain we should go out willy nuilly and rie whereve we want but if there is an existing path, then it makes harldy any difference if it gets a little bit worn - it takes surprisingly short time for any unused path to get overgorwn and reclaimed by natrure.