[Closed] "Mountain biking destroys the landscape I love"

tomorrow's chip wrapping.

its under ethical living, and in general mtbing isnt.

I guess its written to provoke debate, just not necessarily reasoned and thoughtfull debate 🙂
[s]Editing[/s] Rewriting the title and last paragraph would be a good start.

Is the author saying that MTB'ing damages the trails, or that using 4X4s to get to the trails is what causes the damage? Comments yielded this useful document:

http://www.imba.com/resources/science/impact_summary.html

Seems to be a version of a topic discussed any number of times on this very site.

Among the many poorly researched (not researched) assertions is the one about Oil drilling "on the top of Leith Hill" and the spoiling of access for cyclists.

It isn't proposed for the main part of Leith Hill at all, in fact Bury Hill Woods is almost a separate hill. It is also a place that very few people cycle, or even know where it is. Hey ho.

Plus, the landscape the author loves isn't natural in the first place. It will in most cases (certainly in the example of Leith Hill) have changed far far more radically with other human inputs than mountain biking.

Seems reasonable enough to me. folk need to be aware of this.

engaging in a sport that, when practised [b]badly[/b], actively destroys the landscape. It's a dilemma also pondered by skiers

I have highlighted the bit that is crucial.

Mountainbikes do cause erosion . going round puddles widening the eroded areas 'cos you are too cool to put mudguards on, skidding into corners because of poor technique, riding on wet ground.

I think with all areas of life it is important to be aware of your environmental impact and to attempt to minimise this. Outdoor pursuits will always have environmental impact. Be aware of it and attempt to alleviate / minimise it.

Apart from the sensationalist headline, quite possibly provided by the editor rather than the author, she's 100% spot on -

when practised badly, actively destroys the landscape.

Quite a good article by her in last month's Singletrack about Skye IIRC.

Nothing much to argue about there.

Yet on any given weekend, the carparks in the area are full of 4X4s, driven in from London and the surrounds so people can ride

Qulle surprise....the Graun gets a dig in at 4x4s....! Why not just say the carparks (sic) are full of cars? Has she not noticed that most mountain bikers drive crummy old cars with shiny bikes on/in the back? 😉

imho
a flimzy article based on a tiny bit of truth, like everyother article in our country's pathetic press. all this does is create anguish and ill founded hate against ordinary decent people.
most trail damage, be it 4x4 dirt bike or mountain bike or even horse is doen by thick idiots who have no care for the land or the others who use it, and what happens all the "good" people bare the brunt with bans and closures. then what happens? the same people who didnt care continue to use the trails on the sly. problem still exists and contiunes but the majority loose out due to the minority.

more education of trail awareness and respect for other users would do a hundred times more good than this hollow story everwill.

loved the 4x4's in car parks line too - what exactly is that trying to say, you have a 4x4 therefore you are a bad person?? ( and i dont drive a 4x4 byw )

oh it makes me so angry, i cant see that anything in that piece will ever bring any good to the sport or even those who appose the sport.

and she rides an mtb but write such an ill informed piece??

(rant over) 😉

Seems like a fairly well balanced article to me. Especially given the context of it being written about the North Downs/Surrey hills an area which does suffer badly from overuse and erosion on the more popular trails around Leith and Holmbury Hills.

TJ, accept your point - felt as though the article lacked context... no context that actually most outdoor sports have similar impacts (walking around puddles? etc)

Also seems to start from the pre-conception that because the author isn't hugely concerned about ethical living, then all mountain bikers have equal disregard.

Bit of a garbled mess. Could have been cut and pasted from one of the more pointless threads on here tbh.

If no people at all went in the countryside it would be perfect.

This has the heavy hand of a clumsy sub-editor and a word limit all over it.

It's just a box ticking exercise for the Graun:

4x4
Environment
Self-satisfaction
Oil
Cycling-is-the-new-yoghurt-weaving

(I liked the Skye article - its content didn't do any more than the usual ST articles, but it was soooo much better written.)

It's pretty fair. All sorts of things affect the environment, including mountain biking.

I just don't like the picture, really poor. Bad crop, too blurred. Surely they could have done better!

This has the heavy hand of a clumsy sub-editor and a word limit all over it.

I'd go the opposite way. Not enough sub-editing!

The problem isn't that mountain biking causes environmental damage (compared to drilling for oil? Riiiiiiight!) or that it's going to be restricted to trail centres, how you you possibly enforce that?

I think the real problem is that trail centres are fun, and there is such an emphasis on them in today's mountain bike scene that there are vast swathes of riders who think that mountain biking = load up car, drive to trail centre, ride, go home.

I don't think that's bad in itself, more of a missed opportunity and more time sat in a car. But "unnecessary car journeys" doesn't make as good a headline as "destroying the landscape"...

Oddly written article. Can't the [i]Grauniad[/i] get Rob Warner? 😈

Mr Agreeable, not everyone can ride out of their front doors on to marvellous trails. Therefore, it makes sense that if you're going to drive somewhere to ride, why not ride somewhere fun? That's not to say that people don't also drive out to ride more natural trails, of course.

And yes, I do drive to the trails. Taking a train anywhere is prohibitively expensive and ridiculously inefficient. Weekends will almost always see some sort of engineering or diversion, and when you have a bike with you, there's no way you can get on th bus that would link stations for example. Plus, with three or four in the car, it's a much more cost efficient way of getting bikes out to the trails!

I understand people's motives for doing it, what I don't understand is why people feel the need to rag round Cannock or Afan week in week out, when there is far more to mountain biking, and cycling in general. I bet many of the people who ride at trail centres have never bothered to put together a local loop round their neck of the woods, or built their own cheeky trail in the woods, or tried riding at a BMX track for a change. They are content with what is being served up to them and that's fair enough, but they could be trying other stuff too.

I think you may underestimate people, MrA! Granted, there are many people who do just ride trail centres, and why not? It's all good fun. Most people, however, really do fit in to the latter part of your description. I know I do!

I even had a session down at Brixton skatepark on my Enduro the other day! 🙂

[i]I even had a session down at Brixton skatepark on my Enduro the other day![/i]

Putting the Rad in Grandad... 😀

😀

I suspect that many riders don't even know about trail centres, but just buy a bike and pootle round their local trails.

Chakaping, that assumes that they never read any magazines, never go on the internet, and any Sunday supplement with "50 top mountain biking destinations in the UK" goes straight onto the fire. 🙂

CFH, I'm not setting out to stereotype all mountain bikers as lazy buggers who can't use an OS map (and in any case I am firmly in this category myself). I'm just pointing out that a) some of them travel further away than they need to, b) some of them are stuck in their ways, and c) they're missing out as a result.

And while I'm posting, next week I'd like to hear about how you rode round Brechfa on your BMX. 🙂

As mountain biking brings more people with more money to the countryside, stimulating business and community at the same time, I think you could reasonably argue that [b]mountain biking can help to preserve the landscape that we love[/b].

And while I'm posting, next week I'd like to hear about how you rode round Brechfa on your BMX.

Well, the same Enduro was around Brechfa over this last weekend, I'm afraid to say! Left the BMX at home, although it would be great over those tabletops on the Raven! 😀

Mr A - Yep, that was me for years. Blissful in my ignorance and happy to just ride round the woods.

[i]riding on wet ground[/i]

It's a wet country. The issue is not "stop cycling", it's "harden trails" as they have done for popular walking trails in the national parks. Wouldn't that we great?

Landscapes are affected, but it's wildly inaccurate to say it's "destroyed". MTBing is not especially eroding. If you don't want erosion, remove all horses and heavy livestock + all forestry/wardens/farm vehicles .

For example, I was mildly rebuked by a volunteer warden on the Mendip about my muddy tyre tracks on Black Down. I pointed out that they themselves has introduced cattle to the common and pointed out all the muddy hoof prints!

Don't beat yourself up about it.

another pointless blog

I thought this bit was funny

take a long look at yourself in your penis hat
and your lycra fetish
and your special pointy specs
you are so laughable

oh and by the way you are all making yourselves impotent.

by playing on your bicycles too long
you should come in when your mum says tea-time

😀

Nothing particularly untrue with the article but it does rather seem to be written to endorse Joe Publics uninformed view rather than widening it.

Also a bit out of context, yes Mountain biking isn't the most environmental activity but it's far from the worst and there are other social benefits that are derived from it (healthier people, riders going on to commute by bike after starting with off road riding).

Seems to be written around the usual steroetype of cyclists. Mountain bikers never claimed to be environmentally friendly, don't confuse us with the eco warriors. The 4 x 4 comment really was fodder for the masses, I actually do have pseudo 4 x 4 (Honda CRV, not to be taken off-road according to the handbook 😯 ) but if you look in the carpark in Guisburn you're more likely to see vans and old cars than Discoverys.

Sloppy filler journalism, shame it was written by someone who actually rides.

The real question that I would ask is - why is trail erosion so worthy of writing an article about.

In most of the places I ride, if a trail gets over-used by any particular group another route will be found, or the trail will change to follow drier ground etc. The old route will very quickly grow over again and be invisible in a very short time.

All trails are artificial, so why the fuss when they 'evolve'.

Obviously there a very few places in the UK where an over-used trail leaves a real scar, but these are few and far between.

FWIW, I went up to my local trails earlier and saw more damage done by the rain in the last few weeks than has been done by MTBers/horses/walkers in the 15 years I've been riding there.

Jon - the reason the trail were damaged by the rain is that the walkers, horses and bicycles create the conditions for soil runnoff

In area with a lot of peat or with fragile mountain siols erosion leaves huge scars. Maidens in the pentlands used to be a 30+ ft wide bog before it was armoured, Ben lomond path is a scar that can be seen for miles, same with other mountains.

In the time I have been going into the mountains both by foot and bike ( 40 yrs) I have seen huge erosion and while other countryside users cause much I believe that mountainbikers are fairly unthinking or oblivious to the damage they cause - especially when some damage could be easily avoided

mountainbikers are fairly unthinking or oblivious to the damage they cause - especially when some damage could be easily avoided

Extend this to nearly all users of the outdoors and I think it would be a fair comment.

Few people are materially aware of the true impact of their presence or activities in the great outdoors.

I think the fact that we're even discussing this shows that mountain bikers take these issues seriously. Point me to a corresponding thread on a horse riders' or ramblers' forum if you can.

Some MTB'ers take this seriously.

STW is a niche conclave of a niche branch of cycling. I meet more riders on the trail who have never heard of STW, MTBR, BM, Chocolatefoot etc, than not.

TandemJeremy +1

If humans use it for whatever we generally damage it. Look at Jacobs Ladder, the section from the ford via the hairpin bend to the gate was once all grass and very ridable up (before bouncy forks), this section is mainly used by us MTB'ers and is now well worn because of over use (every mag has the two yearly article about climbing Jacobs). If we pretend we don't do damage then we undermine our credability as users of the great out doors. Just to put this in perspective, the Pennine Way from Edale has had almost all of the high level sections paved due to the massive use over Kinder Scout, Bleaklow and Black Hill. Thats done by walker not MTBers (Hmm, well I may checked it out a couple of times to see if theyed done a good job).

STW is a niche conclave

Too true, but we are all united in a sense - by our two wheels, our knbbly tyres, our shared trails, and our mutual love of penis hats. 🙂

Ok - this bit doesnt apply to this thread but the bit in the guardian

Ill infomed inflamitory tosh in my opinion, the sort of nonsense that then starts to get quoted as gospel and just generally makes it harder to get any sensible workable ideas off the ground. Oh its in the Guardian it must be true.

Look at Jacobs Ladder, the section from the ford via the hairpin bend to the gate was once all grass and very ridable up (before bouncy forks), this section is mainly used by us MTB'ers and is now well worn because of over use

But really what difference does that make? The track is a few feet wider? A bit more difficult to ride?

Would we prefer the countryside to be a sort of museum piece that we can gaze at but not touch, or should we be using it?

Fair enough, protect the delicate, easily damaged areas (as highlighted by TJ), but why should we feel guilty about riding on the vast majority of trails.

Most areas that we ride in are not 'natural' in the strictest sense, they are all heavily influenced by human activity - whether that is Leith Hill, my local replanted slag heap, or even places like Dartmoor. We are just one of the newer users, and people resent us for that.

BTW I'm not advocating hooliganism on trails, I'm just puzzled when people invent crap to make me feel guilty for riding a bike.

Oh its in the Guardian it must be true. LOL only a knobber would believe anything that rag, Daily Mail for the left(hargic).

IdleJon - in this case it's getting deeper not wider. Just pointing out that we as MTBers are doing considerable damage to the "honey pot" areas and this could lead to serious access problems at some point. Agree that the countryside is not and should not be a museum but there are people out there trying to preserve it as then think it should be and MTB's are not included. As far as I'm concerned the country side is a place of work for a lot of people and those of us that use it as a play thing don't give them the support and respect they are due, particulary in the Kinder area. Talk to a local shepherd, their nice enough once you get past the thousand yard stare.