All

are there any national organisation that helps with MTB local access issues – does IMBA still exits or British cycling get involved with access issues ?

Cheers

Not sure, but VERY interested in any responses.

Do you mean specific local issues. No I think it’s the LAF.

Imba pretty much dead or at least in a state of dormancy.

Ctc or cycling UK as they are calling themselves now may be able to help.

Open mtb have arisen recently to do this, but I know little about them and am not sure of their role overall.

Interested here too…

surprisingly the donkey whallopers do quite a lot for us

in reality it depends where you are and what the issue is

Local trail issues in Yorkshire really – sorry but who are the wallopers of donkeys ? LAF is local multi ingest council groups but is there any national groups that is using the best learning from local events and creating a national policy ? Is that the role of British cycling or are they focussed more on our Tarmac friends ?

http://www.bhs.org.uk/access-and-bridleways

They are pretty much the only group that actually gets bridleway claims completed

Their national reports are often pro MTB

Open MTB was supposed to be a new voice but it probably suffers from not being a scalable organisation

Cycling UK is the best national voice.

The Local Access Forum is a statutory committee and will have some people who you can talk to who will be able to provide advice on national-local organisations that are a fit for what you want to do

Also PMBA and the Stainburn crew

British Cycling is trying to get in on the act but to be honest they probably hinder more than help, a classic was an article on how an Olympic rider wants to use trails for training at threshold, essentially painting a picture of a supercharged strava hero harassing the ramblers/ horse riders

BC, WC, OpenMTB and CyclingUK (formerly CTC) have been (remarkably) been working together in a number of access projects recently – the Welsh government access consultation, the recent letter to the minister regards access trials, and a number of other behind the scenes issues (MOD national access forum, FC meetings, approaches to national parks etc.)

Each has a slightly different position, eg. BC is (mainly) racing, but over recent years has spread their remit a bit, OpenMTB is trying to ensure that the MTB community gets heard, while as part of the overall rebranding exercise, CyclingUK have been very much looking again at their Off-road side of things, which ties in with the really important survey going on at the moment (see sticky at top of threads page) that they and OpenMTB are running to actually get to the root of the issues and the real priorities for advocacy and what people want (for the record I have been involved in this as a volunteer and have seen the survey results so far in detail, some of which are pretty surprising). CyclingUK are in some pretty high level meetings with government departments about improving access, but progress is glacial and certain vociferous minorities within ‘the system’ are extremely small c conservative and resistant to change.

Previous experience with IMBA (and with CTC) and inside knowledge of what has gone on has me saying that the MTB community has been remarkably reluctant to support advocacy efforts in its name, or to engage effectively with officialdom, and (like it or not) organisations have difficulty devoting resources when it doesn’t increase membership.

I think it’s pretty depressing that so few clubs see local level advocacy and promoting MTB as part of their remit – when you look at the American clubs (NEMBA, North West Trail Alliance, SORBA etc.) it’s a really core part of their work.

Regards problems in Yorkshire, speak to the guys at Singletraction, or email offroad@cyclinguk.org for some advice.

Here we are, a positive step into getting MTB access discussed at the top table

https://www.cyclinguk.org/press-release/2016-09-07/“copy-scotland”-benefit-rural-economy