But surely all riding should be responsible riding wherever you are...
In some respects I think making a very big thing about responsible riding in a single location could tend to make people less worried about it everywhere else. It shouldn't just be something which is highlighted in certain areas, it should be all pervasive.
For my two-penneth, while I would not want to see hoards of people riding the Cairngorm plateau, I see no problem with responsible access. Likewise I don't want to see hoards of walkers up there either.
trailmonkey - MemberWhat we see here is the authorised heritage discourse. This is the interpretation and implementation of heritage resources as dictated by the thoughts of ususally unelected, white, middle class science and history professionals. It ultimately leads to exclusion and seperation of people from the landscape as was the case in Yellowstone and at Uluru.
Luckily, UNESCO are starting to drift away from this and are designating heritage areas as cultural landscapes which recognise the need and value of human interaction with the landscape.
Sadly the influence of the AHD is so pervasive that most of us just accept the so called 'importance' of tags like SSSI, without thinking to question them.
You are Laura-Jane Smith and i claim my £5.
Part of my thesis examined the AHD, small world.
+1 Sanny
This was sounding like a Daily Mail type anti-cycling, pro-rambler thread.
I really don't see how the thousands of walkers do any less damage than the relatively few cyclists.
As said, it is about [u]responsible[/u] use by all groups.
many folk south of the border
If I wasn't trying to be a nicer person I'd tell you to folk off for being so sanctimonious.
Sanny, I thought it was a good example of aspirational journalism as it made me want to ride my bike.
I will get worried though if groups plan to head of and ride such routes... but I'm sure the Scottish weather will do it's utmost to upset such plans, and then you have the midges to contend with, then the climbs themselves, the hike-a-bike sections, the map-work, the exposure, the rocky paths, and the general constant nagging feeling of "what if it all goes wrong".
but I'm sure the [s]Scottish[/s] weather will do it's utmost to upset such plans, and then you have the midges to contend with, then the climbs themselves, the hike-a-bike sections, the map-work, the exposure, the rocky paths, and the general constant nagging feeling of "what if it all goes wrong".
mountain biking by definition..
Thanks for all the traffic and particular thanks to Sanny for the detailed reply.
It comes down to responsible access and whether you believe bikes do more damage than feet. I think the clear consensus here is the plateau is the wrong place for mb's. These rights were hard won - don't help to create the context for them to be rolled back.
How about some mention of this deabte in Singletrack sometime soon - you owe it to all those wee ptarmigans metioned way back at the start.
Now I am off to TGO to give McPish a hard time about pacerpoles - they are the work of Satan.
Why don't mountain bikers have a body that represents us and looks after the trails and such? Or do we, and I just don't know about it? Surely such a thing would be worth £10, £20, £40 of our money a year?
Messiah
You hit the nail on the head. I had to wait several months before I was able to get up there then got very lucky two weekends in a row. I fully expect there will be a posting at some point saying how awful a route it is / too hard / too much carrying / too many midges / awful weather. 😀
The Cairngorms will always be a choice for a fairly select band of riders who I suspect already have many years of experience of being in the hills. The remoteness of the route and the lack of easy bail points will continue to ensure that it is never a popular ride destination. After all, who in their right mind would go on a ride with almost 7,000 feet of climbing in it? You'd have to be crackers! Wouldn't catch me doing that, no siree! 😆
As for the journalist bit, steady on there! I've been called many things but never that. Ha! Ha!
Cheers
Sanny
we do, just no one joins it
I think the clear consensus here is the plateau is the wrong place for mb's
The clear consensus is that there is no consensus.
😉 @ capt.john
at least you'll understand the cut of my post
From the N tional park website:
A very large area. The Park is 4528 sq kilometres in area, over twice the size the Lake District and Loch Lomond and the Trossachs.
A mountainous area. 5 of Scotland's 6 highest mountains are within the Park, there are 55 summits over 900 metres. 36% of the land area is over 800 metres and 2% is over 1000 metres.
An arctic wilderness. The land above 600 metres - known as the 'montane zone' - is the largest area of arctic mountain landscape in the British isles.
So, taking the bit above 800m, that is 1630 sq K. A path is say, 600mm wide, so 100 K of path take up an area of 0.06 sq K.
Assuming MTBers stick to established paths (does anybody [i]really[/i] ride up tto the top of Carn ban mhor then bomb back down over the heather??) the area affected by their manic skidding is so minute it is really a non issue imo.
Still, I do agree that publicising it in a mag with such a wide circulation does wind up some people so it's maybe not the best idea.
Sanny I enjoyed the article, I could read it and think that it sounds interesting but like other places needs some respect. As the Messiah said it looks like a fair bit of working it out for yourself to get there and you might get crucified by the weather/midges.
I could enjoy the article vicariously as living a few miles north of the south coast the Alps are closer than the Cairngorms.
Assuming MTBers stick to established paths
'established paths' become established motorways with heavy traffic, one of the advantages of Scotland's access laws is that open access causes a reduction in the development of massive 'highway' footpaths like those evident in more populous and restricted areas. the means of erosion control necessary on very popular routes are very expensive.
I'm not sure any of that would apply on Cairngorm though, as has been said it's unlikely it'll end up with a massive increase in traffic.
geoffj - Member"I think the clear consensus here is the plateau is the wrong place for mb's"
The clear consensus is that there is no consensus.
I agree with Geoff - there is no clear consensus just a debate. I have discussed this one with many folk mountaineers and mountain bikers and there is no clear consensus at all - its about a 50 / 50 split IME
I've not read the article but I've seen the pictures. I've also ridden with Sanny a few times and know first hand how seriously he takes erosion issues and responsible riding. In fact the constant, No Skidding, Keep to the Path can be a bit boring... especially when he comes here and tells me off for skidding on my own trails! 😉 Did Sanny not also write an article a few months ago where he strongly criticised some guy for riding off the path on Ben Lomond?
The access issues are so complex and there are arguments on both sides. I can find very little evidence of MTB erosion here, however what I see here is the damage that irresponsible MX'rs can do, stuff that I know has been ridden for decades can be ruined in a week when some idiot puts it on Wikiloc and MX'rs ride it on a wet weekend.
My mag should be here this week so I'm looking forward to reading the article then.
The plateaux is Kms wide, the paths yards wide. Riding the existing paths? No problem. Seems Ok for the northside of Cairngorm to have ski facilities visible from the moon but a few MTBs use the paths on the tops and the treehuggers are up in arms.
Doug
Ssshussh! You'll spoil my reputation as eco terrorist with that posting!
I'm glad you remember just as I told you, skids are for kids! 😉
Beagleboy
There is a definite irony to your post. You say you spent two months on the plateau working on a project that facilitated the construction of a hulking great lump of a funicular? I'd be interested to compare the impact of my tyres on two rides with the impact of your walking boots for the two months you spent on the plateau. 😉
Cheers
Sanny
I've not read the article but because if this thread I'm off up there to shred it to bits on my Orange Five. Yes I live south of the border so i'll be pulling loads of skids too.
Sanny +1
Way too snowy for bicycle eco terrorism, i'm off to Sneachda to send "The Magic Crack" for a winter climbers version, the crack now stripped of pesky lichen and turf, is now fair game for my axes and bicycling crampons.
There needs to be perspective, a few mtbrs is a drop in the ocean compared to the numbers of skiers, ramblers and winter climbers.
I read the article, and found it inspirational.
I wish the article hadn't mentioned sticking to paths, because now I am confused with information from the tinternet. Blimey why is everything so flippin complicated?
I note the warning that it might be difficult to get my Orange 5 up there, especially as I am a soft English type who doesn't care about conservation issues. I guess we've never needed to conserve anything down here, that's why we own Scotland. It's a big conservation theme park, peopled entirely by offspring of David Bellamy, who learned a lot in England then emigrated to Scotland, where thankfully it is still possible to ride according to the principles of Jainism.
for Sanny;
no it is not presence of MTBs that would offend me but teh potential for damage by irresponsible riding, eg going flat out along the paths, sliding around corners, skidding down descents. This is what to me separates walking erosion from potential MTB erosion issues. Would MTBers riding up on the plateau not be tempted to treat it as some super trail centre and ride in a manner akin to trail centres rather than in a touring mode? If I recall correctly from the article reference is made to fabulous descents, don`t tell me that part of teh fun is not going as fast as you can down them leading to skidding ??
Why do you make a direct connection between riding fast and skidding? The two are not necessarily linked. Responsible riding can involve speed AND not skidding. It could be argued that sitting on the brakes all the way down a descent would increase the likelihood of dragging the rear wheel. or do you consider riding fast as irresponsible?
Are fell runners more irresponsible than walkers?
Clearly responsible access calls for a permit system to restrict numbers up there.
First come first served, for walkers and riders. 10 a month should keep things pristine no?
I think we should apply to the EU for a grant to put a roof up.
"Would MTBers riding up on the plateau not be tempted to treat it as some super trail centre and ride in a manner akin to trail centres"
Have you been up there? It feels super vast, mountainous, isolated and subject to extreme weather. An injury can be really serious. Nothing like a trail centre.
[img] 
[/img]
Sanny - I am going to continue to call the decision to write and publish (particularly publish) an article that encourages riding on the Cairngorm Plateau moronic. Fair enough the article may or may not feature a route that is already eroded by walkers and it may or may not mention that the plateau is a fragile habitat. But this next bit is where I have a problem - anyone that knows how to act responsibly in a place like that doesnt need an magazine article to figure a route out for themselves. The article will only serve to get people up there who dont have a clue what they are riding over. These people will get lost up there and will end up riding all over the most fragile elements of the ecosystem.
mmm
Being serious for a minute I can't see it attracting anyone that's not a bit of a specialist to go up there.
Not sure I could see some monster energy swiggers being arsed to put the work in to be honest.
It does look 'super vast' and gnarley man
Surrounded By Zulus - Member
Sanny - I am going to continue to call the decision to write and publish (particularly publish) an article that encourages riding on the Cairngorm Plateau moronic. Fair enough the article may or may not feature a route that is already eroded by walkers and it may or may not mention that the plateau is a fragile habitat. But this next bit is where I have a problem - anyone that knows how to act responsibly in a place like that doesnt need an magazine article to figure a route out for themselves. The article will only serve to get people up there who dont have a clue what they are riding over. These people will get lost up there and will end up riding all over the most fragile elements of the ecosystem.
Rubbish. I work with environmental managers and physical geographers who research things like soil erosion and cold environments, and part of my thesis examined issues of conservation so I understand how to treat sensitive landscapes. I've walked up to the plateau twice with students and, because we understand the sensitivity of the area, we pay for local rangers to act as guides. Yet i didn't know there was a mountain bike route of the top. A colleague and I are considering taking our bikes on the field trip this year because of this article.
Loathe to get involved in this, but it's not really a problem if people stick to the paths, is it?
And who's more likely to stray from the paths? Walkers or bikers?
The first poster said it himself - he doesn't have the legs to get involved with a route like this. He can join the club - 99%+ of mountain bikers don't have the legs, inclination or proximity to get up there. So the reality of it (versus the perception) is that it's self-regulating and completely sustainable for such a massive area and the miniscule numbers of cyclists we're talking about. Certainly harmless in comparison to the hiking that gets done.
If you want to argue the perception of mountain biking there then I'd have to agree that's a more contentious issue. Guess that's the nub of the issue with publicising the route in print.
CaptJon - did you read what I wrote? Because if you did you seem to have totally missed my point. Also - there isnt a mountain bike route anywhere outside of a trail centre in scotland, they are merely paths used by people pursuing a number of recreational activities.
Stick to the paths... That's the way to be responsible.
The article specifically states 'stick to the paths' and explains at various points why you should do this. I'm happy to debate the issues around access to this area but being called 'moronic' is stepping over the mark and frankly insulting.
Surrounded By Zulus - Member
CaptJon - did you read what I wrote? Because if you did you seem to have totally missed my point. Also - there isnt a mountain bike route anywhere outside of a trail centre in scotland, they are merely paths used by people pursuing a number of recreational activities.
Someone put a route together for me which i'd not be able to do because i don't know what the local paths are like. A tried and test route ready for action; a bit more countryside opened up for mountain bikers to ride.
Mark - do you really think its responsible to promote riding on the MacDui plateau in a national magazine
Altho it might not generate a lot of extra traffic it might. Several people on this thread has commented on how folk are organising group rides on it as a result of the article.
While it can be debated whether or not it is possible to have responsible access to the plateau on a bike I really don't see how publicising it in a magazine can be anything but irresponsible. Its not as if there is not lots of other riding in the area that is perfectly acceptable.
This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance
I swing both ways on this one. I believe that it's too easy to attract additional visitors by publishing routes. However, I also tend to think that [i]at the moment[/i] this one is pretty-much self regulating on account of its remoteness and the challenge of getting there. I've often said it's strange that thousands of walkers following the same route make a path but one cyclist causes erosion 😕
(Gratuitous Cairngorm summit photo)
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3071/2850661094_6812d105a3_z.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/druidh2000/2850661094/ ]2008-07-28 16-37-40[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/druidh2000/ ]druidh_dubh[/url], on Flickr
However, there are many who would like to see a full-on trail developed from the Ptarmigan [i]down[/i] to either the car park or even Glen More, using the funicular for uplift. That would only ever be possible if the developers and conservationists were convinced that they'd not e encouraging wider access. It seems to me that articles like the one in question are likely to suggest otherwise.
And yet TJ, I can look to the bookshelf on my left and see at least seven guide-books aimed at walkers, all promoting access to the same paths. Do you have none?TandemJeremy - Member
Mark - do you really think its responsible to promote riding on the MacDui plateau in a national magazineAltho it might not generate a lot of extra traffic it might. Several people on this thread has commented on how folk are organising group rides on it as a result of the article.
While it can be debated whether or not it is possible to have responsible access to the plateau on a bike I really don't see how publicising it in a magazine can be anything but irresponsible. Its not as if there is not lots of other riding in the area that is perfectly acceptable.
This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance
Yeah but walkers deserve to enjoy the countryside and areas of intergalactic ecological significance. Mountain bikers don't.
[I]This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance[/I]
So why isn't walkers eroding a path there an issue then?
This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance
Once again, please explain to me this specialness and importance and while you're at it, explain why these definitions should override the opinions of others whose usage of the landscape does not agree with them.
These people will get lost up there and will end up riding all over the most fragile elements of the ecosystem
Maybe you should read the article and look at the pics before writing such moronic comments. The path is well defined, I went up in dense mist and only got a wee bit lost 🙂
I only rode over a few of these before finding the path again.
[img] 
[/img]
So to summarise; the article was responsibly written, there are already a great many articles and books that have been written about this area, we should stick to the paths and/or ride responsibly. Have I missed anything? Get a fat bike maybe?
And I wouldn't worry about folk south of the border coming up and riding roughshod over our precious hills. Most of them start to panic at the thought of the midgies, never mind the cold, the wet and the fact that its further away than Spain or Portugal.
Trailmonkey - there was a very good link given earlier by Geoff that descibes the special significance of the plateau.
some people need to actually read the article!
This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance
if this is the case then why are thousands of walkers allowed to walk all over it every year?
as said above who's more likely to stray from the path, walkers or bikers?
there's some ****ing high dandy horses around 🙄
there was a very good link given earlier by Geoff that descibes the special significance of the plateau.
❓
I found a link from geoffj that was a list of flora and fauna, is that it ? If so, it fails to specify any quantifiable significance. It merely lists a bunch of stuff that scientists have promoted to the point whereby they have some inhererrent importance that we should all accept without question. I fail to see why this interpretation on the significance of the landscape should over ride all others.
Try googling the AHD for an enlightening perspective on the uses of heritage resources.
Mark - do you really think its responsible to promote riding on the MacDui plateau in a national magazine
Yes I do. I think we did it responsibly. That's good enough for me. You don't agree. That's fine too. I expect that fact annoys you a lot more than it does me.
Mark - it don't annoy me. Its clear to me from a series of discussions on here and in real life that this is not a clear cut issue by any means. Folk who understand the issues and whos view I respect disagree with me.
I think debating it is healthy and will help raise awareness of the issues which can only be good. I hope your promotion of riding on the plateau does not lead to issues but I fear it will
Time will tell.
Trailmonkey - do you really not understand how special it is? Are you that hard of thinking? Do you really think your right to roam means you can do what you want when you want without considering anything? 🙄
no need for insults tj, completely unwarranted, just because i don't agree with your point. i'm not even interested in a right to roam, merely interested in questioning heritage interpretation.
the irony is that i'm the one who is actually bothering to think rather than just blindly accepting the importance of one set of values over another.
Trailmonkey - do you really not understand how special it is? Are you that hard of thinking? Do you really think your right to roam means you can do what you want when you want without considering anything?
He's citing an idea which draws on poststructrualist theory to deconstruct hegemonic scientific and political discourses to demonstrate the power relations embedded within conservation designation and practice - i think he gets your perspective. Do you get his?
These fatbikes which are all the rage now are even better, allowing me to get off the beaten track and crush rare plants, ptarmigan eggs and baby capercaillies willy nilly.
😮
What is a Capercaillie? Is it like a sort of hedgehoggy thing?
Is it related to a Haggis?
I don't know about these sort of things, I'm sorry. 😳
I understand trailmonkeys point and in some cases he clearly is right.
However this is the wrong case to make his point the one set of values over another case is really clear on this one unlike in some areas.
That response shows you don't get it.
However this is the wrong case to make his point the one set of values over another case is really clear on this one unlike in some areas
because you say so ? because scientists say so ? because ?
the ahd is strong in this one
*feel free to insult some more.*
again
This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importance
if this is the case then why are thousands of walkers allowed to walk all over it every year?
Me and 10 mates are planning to go next weekend.
What times does the uplift run?
Is 8" enough travel?
What's the best way to cook Capercaillie eggs? Gas or solid fuel?
Thanks!
druidh - Member
> TandemJeremy - Member
> This is a very special and fragile landscape of international importanceAnd yet TJ, I can look to the bookshelf on my left and see at least seven guide-books aimed at walkers, all promoting access to the same paths. Do you have none?
What is a Capercaillie? Is it like a sort of hedgehoggy thing?Is it related to a Haggis?
I don't know about these sort of things, I'm sorry.
Not related at all although Capercaillie breast stuffed with organic wild haggis makes a fab combination
I do understand trailmonkeys point. Its obvious. In some cases he clearly is right.
However he fails to understand why the Ben MacDui plateau is different. Its not just any old SSSI. Its nothing special from a mountainbiking point of view -so in that way its value is low, its very special from a conservationist point of view so in that way its value is high.
Druidh /. pastcaring - thats a whole nother debate I ain't getting into. MY opinion is that in places like this bikes cause disproportionate damage far greater than any walker. No proof, not even any evidence bar my observation. But because I believe bikes cause significant damage thats why I believe that its hard to make a case that riding bikes there is responsible and certainly that publicising it is irresponsible.
Al this is simply my opinion based on what I know and see. Other opinions are available and people such as Druidh whos opinion I respect have one that differs from mine
A rather lovely kind of grouse:
[img] 
[/img]
with a turkey in the backgound 🙂
Really
I mean the ratio of walkers/climber scratching there way around heavily out numbers bicycles.
Lets not mention the amount of poo that is left behind by the red sock brigade.
So what are we saying close the Cairngorms off and just watch videos about them.
Bunch of piss
I fully understand the fragile environment up there I have worked in outdoor education for 10 years but I will continue to ride my bicycle responsibly on the plateau as long as others enjoy the Cairngorms wilderness on foot or any other form of transport ( landrover, stalkers)
Lets not talk about the hundreds of cairns that have been made by walkers wandering off the path and picking up part of the fragile landscape and piling them next to the path on the way to Ben Macdui.
Thanks
Andy
Environmental pressure is the thin edge of the wedge to wind back the right to roam in Scotland.
Its not the responsible people I have issue with - its the thought of people like SimonFBarnes and his bogtrotters that makes me cringe
He believes that bikes cause no erosion, that riding alongside built paths is OK when the armoured path is inconvenient to ride and that he should be able to lead large groups of people anywhere anytime.
too many folk with that attitude and significant damage will be done. Its not the few responsible riders that I worry about - its the risk of attracting large numbers of irresponsible folk.
Edit - and I see "skilful and experienced" riders all the time riding in ways that cause needless erosion - ring round puddles and water bars, skidding to a halt.
Name me another mountain in the uk that has it own dedicated "poo project" because the amount of shit left on the hill?
Sorry to bang on about Jobbies.
Sanny's article didn't smack of being irresponsible more inspirational, get you bicycles out of the sanitised loops tucked away in forests around the UK.
Brought to you by Leffe
thanks Andy
Its not the responsible people I have issue with - its the thought of people like SimonFBarnes and his bogtrotters that makes me cringe
Come on man; how many people blethering on on this thread drive cars, take flights, use plastic baygs, etc etc etc??
Not to mention riding bikes made from materials the extraction/refinement/production of which is environmentally damaging?
NIMBYism.
'Ooh please don't come and damage [i]my[/i] favourite environment even though I contribute to the damage of the environment of other places'.
Pfft...
Me and my stepdad got attacked by an large, enraged, male, nest-guarding Capercaillie up Sutherland way when I was a lad. He had to beat it off with a stick after it went for his eyes, from the vantage point of his shoulders!
Feel free to fry their eggs on a hot griddle.
James-b
Please don't assume that because we enjoyed the descents that we were traveling at warp speed and skidding all the way down the trail. The area is most definitely not a giant trail centre and anyone who treats it as such may be in for a very rude awakening. Phone coverage is virtually non existent and you are a long way from help and civilization if you come a cropper. As with any trip into the mountains, careful planning, knowing you limits and being aware of the hazards you may face are key. Oh and if you manage an average of less than 3 milesan hour, the chances are you aren't riding Steve Peat style on the descents!
It's a [i]boid[/i]? And here's me thinking it was some strange British egg-laying mammal....
I am disappoint. 🙁
[img] 
[/img]
Why can't we have something like that over here?
[i]Racism[/i]. That's why.
Probably.
Surroundedbyzulus - twice in one thread I'm accused of being moronic. Disappointed by that. I mus be losing my touch. Once you've actually read the article, perhaps you may wish to reflect on how you have garnered knowledge of the Cairngorms. You may have one of the many walking and climbing guidebooks that are published for the area or have read about it in a magazine or online. I would suggest that the article is but a drop in the ocean compared to what is already out there in print and online. Perhaps you have walked there with friends who have shared their knowledge of the area. At any point, did you think as a walker about the damage you have helped contribute to? Have you chosen to chastise yourself or the likes of Cameron McNeish and Chris Townsend. Substitute walker for biker in your last post - can you not just as easily ( or perhaps even more so) come to the conclusion that walkers are irresponsible and that there is no place to promote walking in the hills either? I find the notion that walkers are inherently more responsible and have greater mountain craft than bikers to often be at odds with reality. How often do you see folk in trainers and t shirts going up munros, plastic shopping bag in hand. While I may be concerned for their well being, I'm not going to tell them they shouldn't be there. The hills are there for all to enjoy...... responsibly.
If you disagree, that's fine but please try to resist calling me moronic for a third time. Reasoned discourse is great, name calling less so.
Mighty night.
Sanny - brought to you by the number 12 and Bier Halle 2 for 1 pizza .....mmm!
Sanny - brought to you by the number 12 and Bier Halle 2 for 1 pizza
That is a qualitage sign-off.
In fact, it's Elfinapproved. 😀
Perfectly OK to build a car park and railway to the top of said plateau, not to mention a cafe on the very top then.
old_mtber - MemberPerfectly OK to build a car park and railway to the top of said plateau, not to mention a cafe on the very top then.
The railway is not to the top, a lot of folk objected to it, you are not allowed to ride up in the railway and then wonder off onto the plateau
a cracking article and a great response Sanny 😆
doug -
that was on the club email methinks 😆Did Sanny not also write an article a few months ago where he strongly criticised some guy for riding off the path on Ben Lomond?
bring on more summer adventures into our lovely remote hills - yippeee 😀
there's a lot of defense being built around 'well walkers publish guide books so I can publish mountain bike articles..'
great... how mature.. two wrongs don't make a right and all that..
It's a bit like those stories where a houseparty is advertised on facebook and bastards from miles around turn up and wreck the joint.. and consequently I'm also disappointed by some of the reactions to this issue displayed on this thread.. It's nice to imagine that all people that ride bicycles off-road are automatically caring and responsible guardians of the countryside.. but it's hopelessly naive..
I understand that only a very few bastards will make the journey to the plateau.. maybe even none.. and that only a handful of well meaning enthusiasts will rise to the challenge.. out of that handful of enthusiasts I would expect less than half to truly understand the reponsibility..
so why encourage it in the pages of a loved and respected magazine..?
just because we feel that we can really doesn't mean that we should..
And that's why I'm thoroughly disappointed by this.. as a lover of the great outdoors and our wonderful planets stunning hidden secrets.. and nurturing a streak of conservationism fuelled by mountain biking.. I had unwisely assumed that Singletrack and it's contributors would have a more admirable respect for the environment than this..
I understand the arguments and excuses for publishing the article.. but wouldn't it have been far more [i]caring[/i] to just print something else about somewhere else..?
bastards
EDIT: rant over.. great debate.. triumph over adversity hopefully
I do understand trailmonkeys point
Excellent, it's important that people start questioning scientific/academic hegemony in resource management.
However he fails to understand why the Ben MacDui plateau is different..........................its very special from a conservationist point of view
Oh, so you clearly have no idea what i'm trying to say at all do you ?
In an earlier post, you accused me of being hard of thinking. Please allow me to avert the irony in your statement by drawing your attention to a case in point that might allow your own ease of thought.
In Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, there is a cave that contains ancient paintings produced by aboriginal Australians. Conventional, scientific and archaeolgical interpretation of the site led to access to the paintings being restricted with a viewing platform being installed and contact with the paintings strictly prohibited. This 'important' artefact had been successfully conserved. Only one problem. In conserving it, the scientific/archealogical community had completely negated its meaning to the local community who's practice meant that the paintings should, over time, be reworked - in essence destroying what was there.
The point here is that you can't turn the whole world into a museum into which the inclusion and usage of artefacts is dictated by conservation professionals, because in doing so, all the exhibits become meaningless to those outside of the academic discourse.Furthermore the discourse, overtime, attains a weight of credibility that as we are seeing here, leads people to accept its hegemony without question and adopt the mantra- its important because its important to academic research, not because it fulfills any meaningful role in peoples lives.
It's not as you say a case of one set of values against another. In order to reach that parity, you first have to remove the over bearing influence of the AHD which is so inherent in both consevation mangement and lay conservation that all opposition to it is automatically disregarded, as is so clearly being demonstrated on this thread.
TandemJeremy - Member
I do understand trailmonkeys point. Its obvious. In some cases he clearly is right.However he fails to understand why the Ben MacDui plateau is different. Its not just any old SSSI. Its nothing special from a mountainbiking point of view -so in that way its value is low, its very special from a conservationist point of view so in that way its value is high.
Druidh /. pastcaring - thats a whole nother debate I ain't getting into. MY opinion is that in places like this bikes cause disproportionate damage far greater than any walker. No proof, not even any evidence bar my observation. But because I believe bikes cause significant damage thats why I believe that its hard to make a case that riding bikes there is responsible and certainly that publicising it is irresponsible.
Al this is simply my opinion based on what I know and see. Other opinions are available and people such as Druidh whos opinion I respect have one that differs from mine
You really are a numpty TJ. On the one hand you use scientific discourse to designate the Cairngorm plateau as internationally significant and therefore at risk. On the other hand you try to support your argument for banishing mountain bikers from the mountain with your opinion and observation - the opposite of scientific. You can't privilege science in half your argument and and then use your own belief in the other half. 'Other opinions are available' - yep they are. And you seem to deny both those views based on science and those based on lay opinion, despite mobilising both of those value systems in your argument.
Moreover, you say you've observed mountain bikers causing erosion in sensitive ecological landscapes. My question is what where you doing while observing them? Presumably not riding a bike as you've clearly stated riding a bike in these habitats is highly irresponsible.