You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / By Location / Australia / NSW / NSW Trail Advocacy / Official trails to stop mountain bikers in their illegal tracks.
Official trails to stop mountain bikers in their illegal tracks.
From the SMH.
Ben Cubby
October 3, 2011
MOUNTAIN bikers will be welcomed back into some state national parks under a government plan to stop illegal trails being cut.
Construction will start on a series of dedicated tracks in parks around Sydney in the next few weeks, including trails in Garigal National Park and Berowra Valley Regional Park on the north shore, the government has said.
The aim is to end illegal trail blazing, which has led to fines and track closures, and stop conflict between cyclists and conservationists who argue that national parks should be purely wilderness areas.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Critics of mountain biking say a maze of illegal tracks can cause erosion and introduce invasive weeds. The hope is that providing proper trails in safe areas will halt illegal track building.
''It's part of our government's commitment to rethink the way we care for our parks and reserves by finding better, more relevant ways for people to enjoy, appreciate and look after these special places,'' the Environment Minister, Robyn Parker, said.
''It will provide for properly designed, properly rated, purpose-built trails and tracks in parks where it will be most appropriate environmentally.''
Mountain bikers made dozens of submissions and almost 1000 comments on last year's government discussion paper on the issue. ''Sydney has been starved of proper trails for too long,'' Mick Ross, of Australian Mountain Bike magazine and a keen rider, said.
''Making illegal trails has dropped off recently but there is still plenty of bad press about mountain bikers … generally mountain-bike riders are very respectful of the space they are [riding] in.''
The National Parks Association of NSW, which has vigorously opposed people building ad hoc trails through the bush, said it would not oppose mountain-bike riding in designated areas if it stopped illegal activity.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/o...
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
Ben, the issue seems to be that it's generally assumed that trail advocates are xc only riders who don't understand DH.
I know both myself and sammydogg come from DH back grounds. Just because we fail to get DH across the line some times doesn't mean we aren't pushing it or don't understand it.
Our strategy has always been to take steps not try for unrealistic giant leaps.
In the last 10 years land manager have gone from ignoring mtb, to fearing it, to banning it, to confronting the fact that it's hear to stay, to starting to realise it's potential, to welcoming certain forms of it.
The steps continue.
Massive generalisations[1] about to be made here but in my experience Dh guys are much more likely to get involved in trail building. Because of the nature of trails it's nothing for guys to turn up for a day of riding and start with a couple of hours of maintenance first.
And that's great but they also tend to be a younger, more impatient crowd that struggle to get involved with the necessary behind the scene negotiations, especially when those negotiation drag on for months if not years.
The XC crowd on the other hand tend to more willing to do the letter writing and and attend meetings and get political and stuff.
We need all riders doing both to really push forward.
[1]The thing about generalisations is that they are generally true
Quote: We need all riders doing both to really push forward.
This be the truth
Great points there, I agree completely.
dont worry, wasn't directing anything at you or sammydog, if you notice I worded that very carefully so as to not offend, as there where some heated posts by a few guys on here last night that where deleted.
Used the words "Generally" and "Some" and "XC only riders" to make allowances for those that are exceptions.
One of the issues in the recent Warringah Council meeting that was looked at for the Bantry Bay loop was the question of safe crossing points.
The current most popular crossing point (where the Trig Track section turns into the fire road descent to the creek) gives very poor sight lines with a crest to the north obscuring traffic approaching at 80km/hr, and giving only a few seconds to make the call on crossing.
This was discussed at length and a number of options are now on the plate. Southern crossing point could be at the lights, northern crossing point would be across the pedestrian overbridge near the Aquatic Centre. Both will involve cutting new trails to connect with NPWS proposed trails, which it appeared Council reps had no problem with.
The opportunity to create a 20km loop including the Dam should not be dismissed.
An alternative would be to make the ped overbridge a two-way connection.
As to the comment about trail advocates not getting DH, I'd like to mention this:
Two of our core team at Trail Care are primarily downhillers, including the president Simon, and while I don't ride DH myself, it always rates a mention in every submission I make where a site may lend itself to the discipline and where discussion involves overall policy. So I think that's a little unfair.
The fact is XC is easier to get in place. When that is shown to work, land manager anxiety about letting in "technical descending trails" is much reduced. It's a matter of putting one foot in front of the other, explaining the evidence rationally, taking the long view and being bloody persistent.
Guys, could you please follow up any Northern Beaches (or rest of Sydney) chat in the appropriate forum. The Get on your bike in NSW National Parks! thread for example.
In Hornsby, we are very close to getting some trails across the line. But some Nimbys are currently de-railing things and now there are questions of the process, process process, process process ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. I wake up in a cold sweat. But getting back to this thread subject, the person then pulled out the "Now something that you really need to consider Campbell is that you need to get the word around to stop illegal trail building. Its really hard arguing against objectors and getting Councillors and Council onside when we have illegal trails being and continuing to being built locally."
So when you get involved in these discussions and someone brings up this frigging argument, well , its frustrating. Rob is a zealot but in the face of looking land managers in the eye and telling them that you do not support illegal trail building it is important to not support illegal trails. I agree that illegal trails, or unofficial trails have played a vital role in getting us where we are today. And I think there are some real shades of grey. And I wish land managers would listen to the argument that "surely the first way of reducing the problem is to provide a legal facility". But where we are now, well, I think Rob is right to provide the view that we shouldnt do it. Someone needs to take this more extreme point of view. If we dont we may not see any net reduction in illegal trails and it will make it harder to get legal staff through the PROCESS. I have lost count at how many times some nimby has pulled out a web forum discussion where someone is encouraging and defending illegal trail construction. Its embarassing and you know they have been selective but it takes the wind out of your arguments. So when Rob, albeit with a manner that might piss someone off, says "be careful" I think he is trying to prevent a thread of thought travelling down that journey of providing ammunition for selfish nimbys.
In terms of location for NPWS pilot. I say build it where ever there is the best chance of making it a success. From making it sustainable, and cutting back on illegal trail building. The trail that will be built though will not be a downhill oriented trail and may not include the level of difficulty many of us want (although here's hoping). So we cant really expect it to solve the issues of illegal downhill construction. That charge is being led by the likes of some local Councils.
Manly Dam and Bantry Bay together - now you have a ride of a decent length! crossing Wakehurst parkway, surely people can do this safely, how many riders have got hit in 20 years? And ridden together, well, you might even have something as good as Redhill, just easier in grade.
Please see this comment by a key advocate on a recent Red Hill update:
http://nobmob.com/node/31445#comment-100470