|
|
BC’s draft Trail Strategy – the future of our trails is now!
by brule
Posted: Feb 20, 2009
by Ryan Kuhn
It’s a good time to be a mountain biker in BC. In just about every community across the province trails are being developed and enhanced, providing seemingly endless options for all levels of riders. Many are developed by enthusiastic local trail builders with the best of intentions, be it to push the limits of rider ability or simply provide more quality choices for the after work or weekend rip.
However, many of our trails are not “legitimate”…and the province has taken notice. Driven by a need to address the liability of such trails – and the recognition of the health, economic, social, cultural/heritage and environmental benefits – BC has created a draft Trails Strategy to better manage trail use and recreation in the future.
Listen up, because this will have an impact on what, and how, you build and maintain trails the near future and beyond.
It’s a good time to be a mountain biker in BC. In just about every community across the province trails are being developed and enhanced, providing seemingly endless options for all levels of riders. Many are developed by enthusiastic local trail builders with the best of intentions, be it to push the limits of rider ability or simply provide more quality choices for the after work or weekend rip.
However, many of our trails are not “legitimate”…and the province has taken notice. Driven by a need to address the liability of such trails – and the recognition of the health, economic, social, cultural/heritage and environmental benefits – BC has created a draft Trails Strategy to better manage trail use and recreation in the future.
Listen up, because this will have an impact on what, and how, you build and maintain trails the near future and beyond.
History of the trails initiative:
In 2002, the newly elected Liberal government decided, as part of their “core review,” the Ministry of Forests (MoF) recreation program, which had created and managed a vast system of trails and recreational sites across the province, would be whittled to virtually nothing. Despite widespread criticism from virtually every recreation group in the province, this occurred. But that’s another story…
If there is one positive that arose from the cutting of MoF’s recreation program, it is the undeniable need to address recreational trail use and conflict in BC. Compounding the matter is increasing use on sections of trails such as the much-lauded Trans-Canada Trail, where motorized and non-motorized users were coming into conflict, and new challenges such as increasing liability due to the explosion of mountain bike stunts (a.k.a. “Technical Trail Features,” or TTFs) being built in our forests.
In 2006, the province created the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts (MoTCA). Among MoTCA’s responsibilities was assuming control and direction of the recreation and trails in BC along with partner agencies such as BC Parks, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Environment.
In the fall of 2006, MoTCA’s new Tourism Action Plan provided the platform to develop a Trails Strategy as a means to address key issues facing recreational trail use and development in the province. A survey was conducted and a report on the status and high-level inventory of trails developed. The report identified 10 key issues facing trails in BC today – among them, limited funding, enforcement, increased use, lack of standards and … liability.
The Trails Strategy Committee draws from a wide range of representation and expertise, including other BC ministries and a diverse list of mountain biking advocates, societies and industry, as well as other recreational interests such as motorized users, horsemen, hikers and naturalists. The vision, as stated in the draft Trails Strategy, is to develop “A world-renowned network of sustainable trails, accessible to all, which fosters social, cultural, health, economic and environmental benefits for trails users, communities and the province.”
Birth of the draft BC Trails Strategy:
Skip to 2007. The newly created Trails Strategy committee developed – based on the survey and input from the committee – 96 actions that were required to address the challenge of creating a sustainable trail system for all users in BC. These actions were then pared down to 14 Key Actions that comprise the draft Trails Strategy.
“We had to ensure that whatever we came up with was as applicable to the Fraser Valley as, say, it is to Fort St. John, which is a challenge,” says John Hawkings, MoTCA’s trails manager. “It’s got to be high level, strategic stuff, and to make sure we're doing the high priority things because we can’t do everything at once.”
The first thing that was clear, says Hawkings, is there was a huge desire for public input across the province. A public input process, which closed at the end of January, was put in place. In addition, 31 meetings were held in the past year in 11 communities across the province to solicit feedback. These included meetings with First Nations, Inter-agency and government staff, and the public.
“We got a ton of feedback on the draft document, which will now take us into the process of revising the draft document,” says Hawkings.
More than 300 submissions were made on the draft Trails Strategy through a variety of means, primarily the MoTCA website. That’s in addition to the comments heard at the many community meetings. A contractor is now being hired to wade through those comments, filter out themes, concerns and ideas, and prepare suggested changes for the committee to review. That’s expected to be completed by March of 2009.
Devil’s in the details:
The Trails Strategy is intentionally vague in many of the 14 key actions. The reason is each region is going to have to define how they achieve the action items themselves. The hope is that regional trail system plans can be developed through processes already in place regionally such as collaborative Land Use planning in many areas.
However, there is still much work to be done at the provincial level – which could fundamentally change the legality of the trails we build and ride.
“We have to do more work around some of these items, particularly where we are talking about changes to regulations or legislation like the ORV (Off-Road Vehicles) legislation … or enhanced recreation opportunities by addressing liability,” says Hawkings. “We’re talking about assessment of the Occupiers Liability Act and looking at other alternatives.”
The intent is to develop a task force to start looking at legislative items, utilizing lawyers and other experts as well as examples of what’s happening in other jurisdictions around the world and south of the border.
The “L” word:
Liability is arguably the most complicated component to a BC Trails Strategy. In 1996, BC put into law the Occupiers Liability Act (OLA), which addresses liability by clearly putting onus on the user – thus reducing risk to societies, trail management groups and private land owners – yet it is untested (there was one case on Vancouver Island of a biker that hurt himself on a stunt and the land owner and bike society were sued, however their insurer settled out of court and the case was never brought to court).
That leaves much to speculation, particularly the risks associated with mountain bike stunts (TTFs). Currently the province covers insurance for trails without stunts such as cross-country and hiking trails. However, societies that wish to maintain freeride and DH trail systems with stunts are burdened with expensive insurance and uncertainty regarding protection from lawsuits.
The BC Trails Strategy Committee sees need for clarity around the OLA and intends to make that one of its priorities heading forward. In addition, they are looking at recently introduced inherent risk legislation in other jurisdictions such as Wyoming, Colorado and Alaska.
“What we’re saying is, if you have Inherent Risk Legislation, it would almost negate the requirement for local clubs to hold insurance,” says Hawkings. “What inherent risk legislation means is, essentially, if people decide to get on a bike or go for a walk on a trail, they’ve assumed all risks associated with that.”
Inherent Risk legislation in other jurisdictions means an individual or society is not liable for the use of the trails unless they intentionally try to hurt a person. Societies managing trail systems that include stunts have to demonstrate reasonable risk management to ensure the stunt is safe, well marked and with around options. This means a consistent approach to trail standards. Those adopted by BC are the International Mountain Biking Association’s (IMBA) guidelines for trail building and the Whistler Standards for stunts.
While Inherent Risk legislation echoes what is in the OLA, it goes one step further, as in Wyoming, where it doesn’t even allow the case to go to court.
“What we think this would do is negate the need for clubs to be burdened with high insurance cost and legislation,” says Hawkings, “and obviously the mountain biking community is hit with this the worst.”
The Trail Ahead:
While the deadline for comments on the draft Trails Strategy has passed, Hawkings emphasizes that this is a living document and process, and that people are free to email their comments directly to him (John.Hawkings@gov.bc.ca). Additionally, every comment provided will be captured on the MoTCA website for everyone to view.
The feedback will now be consolidated into a series of recommended changes to the Trail Strategy, which is expected by March, 2009. The committee will then determine what changes need to be made before March 31, when the final document will go through government ministries for approval.
Following the approval process, an implementation plan will be developed including key responsibilities and resources.
“We’re not going to be able to tackle all 14 items right off the get-go,” cautions Hawkings, “We’ll have to focus on high priority items. When it comes to going in and doing trail planning in particular communities, it may be that we can only tackle one or two a year.”
Asked if Hawkings believes the Trails Strategy will enable a manageable, sustainable trail system in BC’s future, he doesn’t mince words:
“When we talk about a sustainable trail system, people ask, ‘what do you mean by sustainable? Is it economic, is it environmental?’ It’s kind of both things,” says Hawkings. “But what it really means is that we can have some level of comfort that we’re going to have a trail network that is usable and provide us with the recreation trail opportunities we look for, whether it’s in five, 10, 15 years. All of us expect … that we’re going to have a public transportation system; we’re going to have roads, highways, buses and trains that are going to get us from A to B. There should be no reason why we don’t have the same expectations around trails.”
What does this mean to you, the local freeride trail builder?
•Do your homework: there are many builders out there that see a forested or unused slope and think it’s a canvas to create their own masterpiece. The reality is there are more and more land use conflicts occurring due to builders not doing their homework. This sometimes results in your blood and sweat turning to tears when it’s dismantled. MoTCA is trying to develop a process that would allow you to build trails on Crown Land. They’ll help you determine if the area you want to build is on conflict with other users, agreements or outstanding First Nations land claims.
•Simple standards: Trail standards are not to be scoffed at – sturdy structures are essential to a safe experience as most freeriders can likely attest. As are environmental considerations – we want our trails to last and not permanently harm the environment. If done properly, trails can be progressive and still fit within the standards. It’s about mitigating risk within the creative flow. Coming soon to a trial near you: an education campaign!
•User conflict: Have you ever had that freshly cleared line torn up by an ATVer who was delighted to see you’ve cut the perfect climb? User conflict is increasing in many areas, especially with the rapidly growing motorized user group. If your trail is legit, you will have tools to protect your labor of love. A regional land use planning process helps with this by designating areas for particular uses – get involved, because if you don’t, the ATVer might get your trail designated as the next best moto-track.
[PI=3023438 size=m align=c]Photo by j-brantley[/PI]
•Use your local clubs: Most areas have mountain bike clubs/societies these days. Contact the trails manager – they’re there because they have a passion to build and maintain our trails and can help with the process. They’ll likely have insight into conflicts that can save you some hurt … and time.
•Liability: It’s possible that stunt you built and posted on pinkbike.com could come back to bite you. While most riders assume their own risks, the parents of the 12-year-old who is paralyzed for life after falling off your rickety stunt may not see it that way and take you to court. Building to standards and legitimizing your trail can protect your tail.
•Enforcement: While it’s yet to be seen what resources will be available, it’s quite likely there will be greater enforcement of non-legit trails, especially if you didn’t do your homework and built in the middle of an active tree farm, for example.
•Land access: While 94 per cent of BC is Crown Land (publicly owned), much land near more populated areas is privately owned. MoTCA wants to help negotiate access to private lands where possible. If you build on private land without permission it could lead to conflict and perhaps legal action. Access also pertains to decommissioned forestry roads – the ones we use to access many DH trail systems. MoTCA recognizes the value of these roads and is looking at resources to keep these roads accessible when natural resource extraction is done.
•More: MoTCA wants to help develop sustainable funding sources to maintain our trails, and that can only be a good thing. Mountain bike tourism is recognized as a major draw to BC and a sustainable and legitimate trail system could benefit your community.
Stay tune for Part 2, where regional trail societies will share their thoughts on being pilot projects under the draft strategy, as well as a closer look at key issues and actions of the draft BC Trails Strategy.
Ryan Kuhn is a downhill mountain bike racer, trail builder and trails advocate. He has helped develop trail management agreements in Golden and Kamloops for such areas as Mount 7 and Harper Mountain. He is sponsored by Devinci Bikes, Nema Clothing, SMX Optics and Revolution Cycles and Service. He resides in Rossland, BC.
In 2002, the newly elected Liberal government decided, as part of their “core review,” the Ministry of Forests (MoF) recreation program, which had created and managed a vast system of trails and recreational sites across the province, would be whittled to virtually nothing. Despite widespread criticism from virtually every recreation group in the province, this occurred. But that’s another story…
If there is one positive that arose from the cutting of MoF’s recreation program, it is the undeniable need to address recreational trail use and conflict in BC. Compounding the matter is increasing use on sections of trails such as the much-lauded Trans-Canada Trail, where motorized and non-motorized users were coming into conflict, and new challenges such as increasing liability due to the explosion of mountain bike stunts (a.k.a. “Technical Trail Features,” or TTFs) being built in our forests.
In 2006, the province created the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts (MoTCA). Among MoTCA’s responsibilities was assuming control and direction of the recreation and trails in BC along with partner agencies such as BC Parks, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Environment.
In the fall of 2006, MoTCA’s new Tourism Action Plan provided the platform to develop a Trails Strategy as a means to address key issues facing recreational trail use and development in the province. A survey was conducted and a report on the status and high-level inventory of trails developed. The report identified 10 key issues facing trails in BC today – among them, limited funding, enforcement, increased use, lack of standards and … liability.
The Trails Strategy Committee draws from a wide range of representation and expertise, including other BC ministries and a diverse list of mountain biking advocates, societies and industry, as well as other recreational interests such as motorized users, horsemen, hikers and naturalists. The vision, as stated in the draft Trails Strategy, is to develop “A world-renowned network of sustainable trails, accessible to all, which fosters social, cultural, health, economic and environmental benefits for trails users, communities and the province.”
Birth of the draft BC Trails Strategy:
Skip to 2007. The newly created Trails Strategy committee developed – based on the survey and input from the committee – 96 actions that were required to address the challenge of creating a sustainable trail system for all users in BC. These actions were then pared down to 14 Key Actions that comprise the draft Trails Strategy.
“We had to ensure that whatever we came up with was as applicable to the Fraser Valley as, say, it is to Fort St. John, which is a challenge,” says John Hawkings, MoTCA’s trails manager. “It’s got to be high level, strategic stuff, and to make sure we're doing the high priority things because we can’t do everything at once.”
The first thing that was clear, says Hawkings, is there was a huge desire for public input across the province. A public input process, which closed at the end of January, was put in place. In addition, 31 meetings were held in the past year in 11 communities across the province to solicit feedback. These included meetings with First Nations, Inter-agency and government staff, and the public.
“We got a ton of feedback on the draft document, which will now take us into the process of revising the draft document,” says Hawkings.
More than 300 submissions were made on the draft Trails Strategy through a variety of means, primarily the MoTCA website. That’s in addition to the comments heard at the many community meetings. A contractor is now being hired to wade through those comments, filter out themes, concerns and ideas, and prepare suggested changes for the committee to review. That’s expected to be completed by March of 2009.
Devil’s in the details:
The Trails Strategy is intentionally vague in many of the 14 key actions. The reason is each region is going to have to define how they achieve the action items themselves. The hope is that regional trail system plans can be developed through processes already in place regionally such as collaborative Land Use planning in many areas.
However, there is still much work to be done at the provincial level – which could fundamentally change the legality of the trails we build and ride.
“We have to do more work around some of these items, particularly where we are talking about changes to regulations or legislation like the ORV (Off-Road Vehicles) legislation … or enhanced recreation opportunities by addressing liability,” says Hawkings. “We’re talking about assessment of the Occupiers Liability Act and looking at other alternatives.”
The intent is to develop a task force to start looking at legislative items, utilizing lawyers and other experts as well as examples of what’s happening in other jurisdictions around the world and south of the border.
The “L” word:
Liability is arguably the most complicated component to a BC Trails Strategy. In 1996, BC put into law the Occupiers Liability Act (OLA), which addresses liability by clearly putting onus on the user – thus reducing risk to societies, trail management groups and private land owners – yet it is untested (there was one case on Vancouver Island of a biker that hurt himself on a stunt and the land owner and bike society were sued, however their insurer settled out of court and the case was never brought to court).
That leaves much to speculation, particularly the risks associated with mountain bike stunts (TTFs). Currently the province covers insurance for trails without stunts such as cross-country and hiking trails. However, societies that wish to maintain freeride and DH trail systems with stunts are burdened with expensive insurance and uncertainty regarding protection from lawsuits.
The BC Trails Strategy Committee sees need for clarity around the OLA and intends to make that one of its priorities heading forward. In addition, they are looking at recently introduced inherent risk legislation in other jurisdictions such as Wyoming, Colorado and Alaska.
“What we’re saying is, if you have Inherent Risk Legislation, it would almost negate the requirement for local clubs to hold insurance,” says Hawkings. “What inherent risk legislation means is, essentially, if people decide to get on a bike or go for a walk on a trail, they’ve assumed all risks associated with that.”
Inherent Risk legislation in other jurisdictions means an individual or society is not liable for the use of the trails unless they intentionally try to hurt a person. Societies managing trail systems that include stunts have to demonstrate reasonable risk management to ensure the stunt is safe, well marked and with around options. This means a consistent approach to trail standards. Those adopted by BC are the International Mountain Biking Association’s (IMBA) guidelines for trail building and the Whistler Standards for stunts.
While Inherent Risk legislation echoes what is in the OLA, it goes one step further, as in Wyoming, where it doesn’t even allow the case to go to court.
“What we think this would do is negate the need for clubs to be burdened with high insurance cost and legislation,” says Hawkings, “and obviously the mountain biking community is hit with this the worst.”
The Trail Ahead:
While the deadline for comments on the draft Trails Strategy has passed, Hawkings emphasizes that this is a living document and process, and that people are free to email their comments directly to him (John.Hawkings@gov.bc.ca). Additionally, every comment provided will be captured on the MoTCA website for everyone to view.
The feedback will now be consolidated into a series of recommended changes to the Trail Strategy, which is expected by March, 2009. The committee will then determine what changes need to be made before March 31, when the final document will go through government ministries for approval.
Following the approval process, an implementation plan will be developed including key responsibilities and resources.
“We’re not going to be able to tackle all 14 items right off the get-go,” cautions Hawkings, “We’ll have to focus on high priority items. When it comes to going in and doing trail planning in particular communities, it may be that we can only tackle one or two a year.”
Asked if Hawkings believes the Trails Strategy will enable a manageable, sustainable trail system in BC’s future, he doesn’t mince words:
“When we talk about a sustainable trail system, people ask, ‘what do you mean by sustainable? Is it economic, is it environmental?’ It’s kind of both things,” says Hawkings. “But what it really means is that we can have some level of comfort that we’re going to have a trail network that is usable and provide us with the recreation trail opportunities we look for, whether it’s in five, 10, 15 years. All of us expect … that we’re going to have a public transportation system; we’re going to have roads, highways, buses and trains that are going to get us from A to B. There should be no reason why we don’t have the same expectations around trails.”
•Do your homework: there are many builders out there that see a forested or unused slope and think it’s a canvas to create their own masterpiece. The reality is there are more and more land use conflicts occurring due to builders not doing their homework. This sometimes results in your blood and sweat turning to tears when it’s dismantled. MoTCA is trying to develop a process that would allow you to build trails on Crown Land. They’ll help you determine if the area you want to build is on conflict with other users, agreements or outstanding First Nations land claims.
•Simple standards: Trail standards are not to be scoffed at – sturdy structures are essential to a safe experience as most freeriders can likely attest. As are environmental considerations – we want our trails to last and not permanently harm the environment. If done properly, trails can be progressive and still fit within the standards. It’s about mitigating risk within the creative flow. Coming soon to a trial near you: an education campaign!
•User conflict: Have you ever had that freshly cleared line torn up by an ATVer who was delighted to see you’ve cut the perfect climb? User conflict is increasing in many areas, especially with the rapidly growing motorized user group. If your trail is legit, you will have tools to protect your labor of love. A regional land use planning process helps with this by designating areas for particular uses – get involved, because if you don’t, the ATVer might get your trail designated as the next best moto-track.
[PI=3023438 size=m align=c]Photo by j-brantley[/PI]
•Use your local clubs: Most areas have mountain bike clubs/societies these days. Contact the trails manager – they’re there because they have a passion to build and maintain our trails and can help with the process. They’ll likely have insight into conflicts that can save you some hurt … and time.
•Liability: It’s possible that stunt you built and posted on pinkbike.com could come back to bite you. While most riders assume their own risks, the parents of the 12-year-old who is paralyzed for life after falling off your rickety stunt may not see it that way and take you to court. Building to standards and legitimizing your trail can protect your tail.
•Enforcement: While it’s yet to be seen what resources will be available, it’s quite likely there will be greater enforcement of non-legit trails, especially if you didn’t do your homework and built in the middle of an active tree farm, for example.
•Land access: While 94 per cent of BC is Crown Land (publicly owned), much land near more populated areas is privately owned. MoTCA wants to help negotiate access to private lands where possible. If you build on private land without permission it could lead to conflict and perhaps legal action. Access also pertains to decommissioned forestry roads – the ones we use to access many DH trail systems. MoTCA recognizes the value of these roads and is looking at resources to keep these roads accessible when natural resource extraction is done.
•More: MoTCA wants to help develop sustainable funding sources to maintain our trails, and that can only be a good thing. Mountain bike tourism is recognized as a major draw to BC and a sustainable and legitimate trail system could benefit your community.
Stay tune for Part 2, where regional trail societies will share their thoughts on being pilot projects under the draft strategy, as well as a closer look at key issues and actions of the draft BC Trails Strategy.
Ryan Kuhn is a downhill mountain bike racer, trail builder and trails advocate. He has helped develop trail management agreements in Golden and Kamloops for such areas as Mount 7 and Harper Mountain. He is sponsored by Devinci Bikes, Nema Clothing, SMX Optics and Revolution Cycles and Service. He resides in Rossland, BC.
58 Comments
- + 2
rollinwith26s
(Feb 24, 2009 at 0:34)
legalities take the fun out of building
Legalities take the fun out of EVERYTHING...I'm surprised we still have insurance corporations around... Seeing as everyone sues everyone these days.
the thing people dont get is that riders arent going to ride a trail that they build or go to.. fall, hurt themselves, and immediatley think to sue whoever owns the land... i sure as hell wouldnt.. its your fault if you fall particularly if it is on something you think is unsafe and built poorly... so its no one elses problem anyway! i just dont understand people these days!
we have a large property where the bikers are getting kind ah carried away building jumps etc. We love to see the youth burning energy and having fun , but are being coached to remove all jumps and sign to minimize liability. Not being bikers we have no way knowing if the jumps are built to any safety standards ( is there a safe 65 foot jump ? ) so don't know what to do. Is there any suggestions out there how to avoid a lawyer?
dbtrethewey@yahoo.com
dbtrethewey@yahoo.com
one way to avoid it would be to get the riders to sign a contract saying that you cant be held liable if the injure themselves... but if you are takling 50 or 60 riders then that is gonnabe difficult! if you a talking abuot a small crew of riders then the contract thing could work... it would hold up find in Britain!
yep but at least if you followed the rules and meet safety standards... your away from being responsible... there are always dumb... but not your problem if you got your conscience for yourself 
that is true, but no cooperation can protect a trail from the clueless parents of some kid that fell off a drop. Even motocross tracks are getting shut down because of law suits and to ride those you have to sign a waiver that disables you from filing a law suit. Don't get me wrong I love the idea, but I dont't think its gonna solve all the problems that come with freeride trails.
[Reply]
The liability sounds like a ski resort having to have everyone sign a waver with contact information request just to cover your their a$$. No wonder you don't see parks like these everywhere.......good luck, because it looks awesome.
[Reply]
f*ck jeah, so many people involved in this projects, i wish that in my countra will be so many people interested in bicycling
[Reply]
Inherent Risk legislation sounds like a good idea. Maybe if BC adopted that other provinces would follow and let resorts like blue provide better riding and more access. people who try to sue someone else for their own f*ck ups should be left out to die where they land. and props to BC for trying to standardize a system that would be beneficial for all and consulting/recognizing the involvement that bikers have.
you guys are lucky to have progress WITH the process! It my inspire other local govs to work with other riders here in the states..
Great article Ryan! Here in ALberta we are adressing similar issues but the govt is many years behind BC. We have to pay for liability insurance as a trail advocate society. Luckily this is available via IMBA, but it is inspiring to think, that down the road Inherent Risk legislation may be something Alberta considers and could be a possible option. Insurance provides permission and liability coverage but putting that cost into our trails is obviously the better option.
i dont want people who dont ride telling me whats safe or not. its like kids and skateboarding... telling them whats right and whats not. isnt it up to us. go ahead tear it down. its a lifestyle thing we ll just put a bigger one back up!!! dont let them decide for u!!! and to that f*g that sued and probably started all this.... dont bite off more then u can chew. and dont let the govt make money off your passion. i only skimmed threw the article but thats how i feel. and some times rickety stunts are part of freeride.
rickety stunts are NEVER!!! a part of freeriding. safety is ALWAYS!!! the number one priority when building.
lol i live at a world class resort and we hit everything, jumps that have been there years. sure some might be shakier then others but we still hit em. obviously u have to use a lil common sense. if its broken dont hit it. i just ment that certain places have there stuff so groomed its like riding a sidewalk... thats not freeride. if u let the man tell u whats safe and whats not his view of whats safe might be differant then yours. 20 foot jumps might not be safe for him but you might love em. thats what makes this sport ours and not theirs. if they decide what is "safe" for u, u might lose half of your jumps on a single trail. and that would suck!!!!!!!!!!!!!
your lucky
if you tried getting people to help you build trails where i live you would probably get beaten up cos no one gives a shit about anyone else round here
if you tried getting people to help you build trails where i live you would probably get beaten up cos no one gives a shit about anyone else round here
Ill agree with that, i would like to build locally it possible i just need people to help!
Everyone just expect there to be a trail there!
Plus motorbikers ripp all your hard work to shreds.
You should all feel proud to have people building like this, come on all you britans lets do some catching up.
and that trail looks mint!!!
Everyone just expect there to be a trail there!
Plus motorbikers ripp all your hard work to shreds.
You should all feel proud to have people building like this, come on all you britans lets do some catching up.
and that trail looks mint!!!
Excellent article, thank you so much for posting Ryan!
Looking forward to part 2.
I've forwarded your write up to our local Trails Society and a few other interested parties. While I am relatively new to MTB trail building I have experience in building multi-user trails in the Interior and was involved in the land use process from '97 to ''01. I am delighted to see how accurate you've captured the situation. It's my opinion that many interested builders and users drop out of the land use discussion because of the complexity of the issue and a sense that this isn't going anywhere... let's hope stories like yours will help revive interest in the subject and get people on board.
Pinkbike already provides a great platform for trail-builders to share information and discuss building issues. Any additional information, like this article is so important to all riders and should be featured on the site.
Looking forward to part 2.
I've forwarded your write up to our local Trails Society and a few other interested parties. While I am relatively new to MTB trail building I have experience in building multi-user trails in the Interior and was involved in the land use process from '97 to ''01. I am delighted to see how accurate you've captured the situation. It's my opinion that many interested builders and users drop out of the land use discussion because of the complexity of the issue and a sense that this isn't going anywhere... let's hope stories like yours will help revive interest in the subject and get people on board.
Pinkbike already provides a great platform for trail-builders to share information and discuss building issues. Any additional information, like this article is so important to all riders and should be featured on the site.
Every liability suit filed steals EVERYONE'S freedom. Pretty soon we sill not be able to legally play with gravity at all. If you are going to do things that could disable you on other people's property, CARRY LIFE INSURANCE!!!! This is not rocket science...If you have to sue someone, you f*cked have up one way or another.
If you turned the crank the responsibility is YOURS. This is common sense.
If you turned the crank the responsibility is YOURS. This is common sense.
most usefull write-up on pinkbike in years, this is what the community really needs to know about... Thankyou. every rider should be in the know, crown land belongs to the people dammit, whats done with that land should be dictated by the the people who vote- the users and rightfull owners of that land.... dont let your right to ride get lost for lack of represtatiion or natural resourse exploitation, our crown land nation wide is being raped for profit at evey riders expence, our right to ride depends on our voices being heard....I could go on forever, our government can create 16,000skm toxic lakes in national parks for profit while at the same time denying people access to their own land for the riding of bicycles.....anyway thankyou brule, it is pinkbike's responsibility to to keep the community in the know on the news that pertains to us, hope the MoTCA is a good supporter of the cycling community
Well written, Ryan. One of the problems I see is with MULTI USER TRAILS. They don,t work.A mountain bike trails built by bike clubs builders should be for that purpose
"... MULTI USER TRAILS. They don,t work...."
Yes, I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately in my experience some communities don't have an understanding of the importance of MTB/Freeride trails to the local economy. They think the more people can use a trail, the higher the value to the community. BS, because you'll loose the fastest growing market segment and end up with a few hikers and family riders on their department store bikes. There's still a perception out there that this relatively new sport is aimed at a small and young user group, wrong! We have to advocate and raise awareness for our hobby/sport and "impress" municipalities with economic impact studies on MTB.
Yes, I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately in my experience some communities don't have an understanding of the importance of MTB/Freeride trails to the local economy. They think the more people can use a trail, the higher the value to the community. BS, because you'll loose the fastest growing market segment and end up with a few hikers and family riders on their department store bikes. There's still a perception out there that this relatively new sport is aimed at a small and young user group, wrong! We have to advocate and raise awareness for our hobby/sport and "impress" municipalities with economic impact studies on MTB.
Ryan, thanks for excellent article. I am interested to see how all this will be affected by the upcoming BC election. If we have a change in government, will that initiate yet another change in “strategy”? After all the province did have a recreation program under the Ministry of Forest prior to the change in government. Would a change in strategy be in trail builders and trail users best interest? Does the MoTCA have the teeth to facilitate any change or improvement to the existing status quo? I for one find the “intentionally vague” strategy disturbing. What does this provincial strategy end up looking like on the ground? How does it end up affecting local trails societies or renegade trail builders, and most importantly the trails in the woods?
thank you for the info. back home when i left there was talk about sectioning off a chunk of land and making it a mountian bike park i was in the middle of getting a hold to the first nations cheif to offer him a hand its production. like the article says do your homework and be respectful and you wont have an issue
I for one think that the intentionally vague.. or gray areas may work in our favour as trail builders and riders. Given the economic status in this province. IF clubs are vocal enough and and folow imba policy the government will have to listen
[Reply]
[Reply]
Excellent Article!
We really need to work together as a community to build responsible, enjoyable and lasting trails.
We really need to work together as a community to build responsible, enjoyable and lasting trails.
As a club member currently in the middle of this process, I support it.
It took the relocation of a golf course, loss of trails and threat to lose more to get us organized. We are still in a state of uncertainty with some of the golf course land. Had we been organized and recognized our trail network before the relocation, we probably would not have had as many obstacles.
I encourage you to dig in, talk to your local District Recreation Officer to see how you can go about it. When talking about Crown land, if someone else beats you to the punch then you'll be losing an uphill battle trying to save it (and snivelling a whole bunch!)
It's been a lot of work (over 2 years) but in the face of the alternative... Hopefully some of the ground work has been done and future initiatives will be quicker through the gate.
Or, you can just be free and keep riding - but when you lose your trails, you'll really be free - to go somewhere else.
For more information on our project, check out our web site - Prince George Cycling Club
http://www.pgcyclingclub.ca/pages/pidherny/information.html
It took the relocation of a golf course, loss of trails and threat to lose more to get us organized. We are still in a state of uncertainty with some of the golf course land. Had we been organized and recognized our trail network before the relocation, we probably would not have had as many obstacles.
I encourage you to dig in, talk to your local District Recreation Officer to see how you can go about it. When talking about Crown land, if someone else beats you to the punch then you'll be losing an uphill battle trying to save it (and snivelling a whole bunch!)
It's been a lot of work (over 2 years) but in the face of the alternative... Hopefully some of the ground work has been done and future initiatives will be quicker through the gate.
Or, you can just be free and keep riding - but when you lose your trails, you'll really be free - to go somewhere else.
For more information on our project, check out our web site - Prince George Cycling Club
http://www.pgcyclingclub.ca/pages/pidherny/information.html
I'm of the opinion that a rider needs to be wholly aware of their skill level. yes we all want to progress and improve. Yes we all get a thrill out of going bigger. But we all have to realize the inherent risk in what we do, especially when attemping a new stunt. If a persons' judgement is faulty and they bail/crash/eat it, no one should be responsible for that decision except the one making it. Im pretty sure that no one builds a trail with the intention of mangling riders. Know when to step away. It's got nothing to do with ego. It's called self preservation, a basic principle of evolution.
And if that rider gets mangled something fierce when they bail, they need to bone up and admit they were wrong in attempting something - Not turn around and sue everyone even remotely associated with that trail to compensate for their lack of judgement. Same goes for their parents. Little johnny was a cracker and went to big. Deal with it. Maybe you should pay more attention to youre little rugrat and supervise him a little more.
If I bailed on a whistler stunt am I going to sue whistler? i doubt it. Im gonna limp away, heal and think a little more about it next time. Anyone who attempts to sue a trailbuilder/association needs to be lobbied hard on this mtber code. and if they dont back off, they need to be ostracized (sp?). The MTBer community can't survive when people with this attitude are part of it.
And if that rider gets mangled something fierce when they bail, they need to bone up and admit they were wrong in attempting something - Not turn around and sue everyone even remotely associated with that trail to compensate for their lack of judgement. Same goes for their parents. Little johnny was a cracker and went to big. Deal with it. Maybe you should pay more attention to youre little rugrat and supervise him a little more.
If I bailed on a whistler stunt am I going to sue whistler? i doubt it. Im gonna limp away, heal and think a little more about it next time. Anyone who attempts to sue a trailbuilder/association needs to be lobbied hard on this mtber code. and if they dont back off, they need to be ostracized (sp?). The MTBer community can't survive when people with this attitude are part of it.
Liability should be the responsibility of the user, everyone should take a little more responsibility for themselves in every situation in life. i agree totally with foghorn1 that every liability suit steals our freedoms, and is indirectly making us into a society full of pussys. No one is even allowed to get hurt nowadays without legal ties, what ever happened to get hurt, learn from what YOU did wrong and do it better next time. what doesn't kill you makes you stronger and hopefully smarter.
Post A New Comment
Why was a comment deleted?
1. add additional on topic info to the article that other users will find useful
2. add props and support/encouragement for the video/photo/article/product/story
3. add and explain constructive criticism for the video/photo/article/product/story
1. add additional on topic info to the article that other users will find useful
2. add props and support/encouragement for the video/photo/article/product/story
3. add and explain constructive criticism for the video/photo/article/product/story
RSS
