Uncle Dave
The Scofflaws
Sometimes, this writing process takes a bit longer than you’d think. Take this here piece. I started it last year. I shared it with some people. I gave it the ol’ turd polish a good four or five times. I tucked it away and then I brought it back out. It was nearly there but I just stopped caring and lost steam, but I think I’ve finally figured out a way to bring it on over the finish line.
One of the more interesting things about growing old is realizing how delusional you were in your youth. “Youth” here refers to anything that happened more than three years ago, give or take. Getting old allows you to look back and recognize how your specific character flaws created situations of awkwardness and failure. I still haven’t figured out exactly how to best utilize this information, but I’m happy to finally be able to assign some blame and create understanding.
Of my character flaws, the strangest is my inability to convince anybody of my earnestness. So often, I’ll find myself saying something with what I feel is honesty and intensity, only to be met with “are you…being serious right now?” (at best) or “you don’t need to be such a dick about it!” I think I told this story before, where I was delivering a speech at a wedding, speaking with what I felt was heartfelt emotion, only to be met with people shaking their heads, laughing and slapping the groom on the back.
The character flaw that gets me into the most trouble is my inability to keep my mouth shut when I witness a flaw in a plan. On the good side, I think this is the sole thing that keeps me from being spit out the bottom of the engineering profession. I have an innate ability to see exactly where things are going to go wrong and then tell people all about it. The biggest challenge with that is that people expect you to find some sort of solution to the problem that you just found and loudly pointed out. That part feels a little bit unfair.
The final character flaw that factors into our discussion today is a sort of meta character flaw based on a character flaw. It’s the fact that I seem to have taken on self analysis as a form of vindictive hobby, creating a perpetual loop of introspection, criticism and understanding that begets more introspection, criticism and understanding.
Put these together and it brings me to my new, old-aged wheelhouse of sarcastic bouts of analysis (external and self) that I can’t keep quiet about. Throw in the typical old person ramblings of “back in the day”, brooding upon failures and attempts to show that our knowledge and skills still hold some sort of relevance, and you begin to:
A) Understand my limited appeal and audience, and
B) Have the makings of a pretty solid NSMB motto.
It’s around here that you will see why things ground to a halt. Sensing the controversy of the upcoming subject, I reached out to a few people that I know, to get their thoughts on this piece. At this point in my life you’d think I would have learned that the relationship between adding people and timelines is exponential, not linear.
What’s written above should give you some idea as to why 90-95% of my bicycle rides are solo. Most of that is self imposed. Since we’re already three deep on character flaws, I should mention that I’m not very good at planning ahead either, so my rides are often fairly rushed and last minute, as involving other people in plans feels like so much work. Even so, a healthy 5-10% of the time I do like to get out with other people, re-experience socializing and perhaps find the hot new trail the kids are talking about (you know…the 35-year-olds). That ratio is going to become even more extreme upon completion of this piece.
Okay…so far so good…Right about here is where people started to get really hung up on things. But I found a solution!
At least three times per year I like to try to get out and ride with the ████████████ . Without naming names, there’s a group of ████████████ that should probably form a club and get matching tattoos. They ride all the fucking time on trails I’ve never heard of and talk about it endlessly. On any given day you can probably find at least two of them drinking beers in a parking lot at the bottom of ███████.
A month or two back (or a year plus, as it were) I eavesdropped on one of their conversations, got wind of their plans, and showed up at the specific time and place of their meeting. We drove to the top and then rode down a hunk of mountain that I’d never imagined contained bicycle trails.
Time was running short, but a second lap was agreed upon and it was decided to ride a more centrally located lap, over where the normal people ride. You’d think this might involve riding down trails that exist on a Trailforks map, but of course not. It’s like a fucking game of the-floor-is-lava with these guys and they’ll perish if they spend too much time on an officially designated mountain biking trail. Everything we rode was new to me, even though we were only a stones throw from the trails that I normally ride.
For you non locals, ███████ is one of ███ peaks that we consider to be “The ███ Shore”. It’s (probably) the busiest of the ███ mountains due to the mix of terrain, ease of access, shuttleability, and sheer number of trails.
Each person that I shared this piece with had their own personal sticking point. “Can you get less specific about the trail?” “Could we avoid a reference to a specific mountain?” “Should we admit that bikes were involved?” People had issues. The solution should have been obvious. Redaction! I mean, part of me was like “fuck ‘em!” Do I really care if a vague allusion to a specific place rustles a few feathers? But then I realized that by being so specific, I was creating a giant path towards loopholes and excuses. This isn’t really about one specific trail. That trail is just an example. Redacting the specifics prevents certain people from rationalizing all of this away.
On ███████, the trails are vast and varied. They range from the relatively easy to the nearly impossible. Some are mountain bike specific, and others see lots of traffic in the form of hikers, trail runners, dog walkers and confused tourists. There’s something for almost everyone, and even after all of these years riding there, it still serves up surprises.
Generally, the surprises take on a consistent form. You may first notice a few interesting tire tracks where you wouldn’t expect them. Over the next few months that might develop into a slightly more visible path into the woods. Almost overnight, that will turn into a trampled mess with a few sticks thrown over top as camouflage. “And that, young man, is where new trails come from.”
Back to the ride, and we find ourselves at one of these newish trailheads. We dropped in and it turned into another secret-trails-on-top-of-secret-trails adventure. This was all fine and expected. Things took a turn near the bottom.
We finished on an ███████ and where most people zigged, we zagged. After a few minutes of poking our heads into the woods, we turned onto a shitty little trail that sucks and was pointless. The end of this trail was yet another haphazardly trampled pile of bush that I’d been noticing on my solo climbs to the top. This one happened to be only a minute or two from a heavily used parking lot.
For me, this was confusing. I understand the urge to carve a trail where there are no trails so that you can experience something new and exciting. I’m less understanding of something so trivial in such a highly visible spot. It reminded me of those kids in high school that were always in trouble because they either didn’t care enough or weren’t smart enough to conduct their rule breaking in a place that wasn’t directly viewable from the window in the administrative office. Did whoever created this trail know that we’re not really supposed to just create trails wherever we want? Did all of the people trampling through, after the fact, have any concerns about their contribution? Was this the best use of our political capital?
It felt a bit embarrassing to me to be riding something like that. If I’m going to go to the trouble of riding an illegal trail, I at least want to make it worth the effort. I don’t like to sheepishly ride by a group of hikers without having had an amount of fun proportionate to the potential fine/karmic retribution. This thing? This was pointless. It was like driving around in front of a police station with a cell phone pressed to your ear, talking to your mother about the mark your nephew got on his math test. Pointless, boring and expensive for all involved.
Now, as we discussed earlier, my character flaws made it hard for me to keep this to myself. As we rode back to the vehicles I asked one of the ███████ about the origins of this trail and wondered why it existed. He was really confused about the premise of my question. Whether a trail should exist or not wasn’t a thought that had crossed his mind. “Why is that trail there? Are you being serious right now?”
Of course, these conflicts in mountain biking aren’t new. It’s the age old shuttlers vs climbers, DHers vs XCers debate. We all come at this sport with a slightly different perspective and set of expectations, and we all assume everybody else is wrong and how we do things is “proper mountain biking.” I had never thought of this before in terms of trail absolutists vs. trail conservationists, and it feels a bit strange to me that I’m coming out on what could be perceived as the “fewer trails” side of this spectrum.
However, if you take a step back and think about it, ███████ is a pretty magical little place. You might even wonder how we get away with it. How is it possible that this world class riding area exists so close to a major city? How is it possible that we can ride so freely amongst so many other users? It’s amazing that we have what we have, and I don’t think I’m alone in thinking this. If you talk to dedicated ███████ riders, they speak of the place with awe and reverence. They’ll talk your ear off about how it is the best place to ride, and may even mock you for riding other places. It’s a level of commitment to a geographical area that borders on obsession. And then they’ll hop in their trucks, drive to the top and trample some bushes on the way to their newest creation.
This is where the contradiction begins to form. How can we feel so passionately about something, yet do things to it that might harm it in the long run? How can we care for it so deeply in certain respects, and then not at all in others?
I don’t actually think that there is an answer to this question. If we’ve learned anything in the last few years it should be that it’s very difficult to get people to make decisions with the long term in mind. I’m not even sure how much change I want myself. I don’t wish to see an end to secret trails on ███████, or anywhere else. I ride sanctioned trails more than I ride anything that is off map, but it is an experience that I sometimes enjoy.
But I worry that if we don’t get a little bit smarter about this, we’re going to create challenges for the future. We’re always going to put our own needs and enjoyment ahead of those of other users, but I worry about what might happen if our needs and enjoyment start to infringe on those of other users. That’s where our trail libertarianism may bite us in the ass.
What we need to consider is that we are no longer a fringe sport. Our user base has grown, and we’re now the majority rather than the minority. We’ve shifted from “outlaws”, to “middle aged men who bought Harleys.” As a result, our actions need to evolve. What may have only seen a bit of traffic a decade ago might now see an alarming number of people who don’t necessarily know what they’re doing. If we don’t take those people into account with our decision making we may just love ███████ into the ground. That doesn’t mean we need to blow the whole thing up, but I don’t think it’s worth negatively impacting our future over a shitty little trail that sucks and is pointless.
Sorry,
Uncle Dave
Uncle Dave’s Music Club
The New Pornographers are a bit of a strange band. The roster is insane. AC Newman, Neko Case and Dan Bejar, plus a host of secondary characters with impressive histories of their own? It’s not quite a Broken Social Scene (I threw on You Forgot it in People moments after typing this) type of all star collective, but it’s not too far off, either. But how many people are out there flying their New Pornographers super fan flag?
When you consider Myriad Harbour, this is hard to understand. While I really dig what AC Newman brings to the table, what I think pops with this song is the Dan Bejarness that Dan Bejar brings (who would think?). He goes so far away from catchy that he catches it on the rebound.
If you listen to the song and agree, then check out these two other things. First, this fucking essay on how great of a song this is. After that, watch as the New Pornographers pull some dude out of the crowd to sing lead…and he just fucking kills it! This gave me the chills when I first watched it.
Comments
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
The conclusion I have come to is that humans have a very hard time understanding scarcity and our personal impact on the world. In part due to our evolving in a world where we were a minor species in a vast wilderness playing with sticks (as in I believe this is in our DNA), and in part due to our very short life spans.
based on that basic human trait, people get frustrated with the process of getting trails approved, maintenance of existing infrastructure is not as sexy, policy is boring, planning is mostly just talking, enforcement is non existent. most of us have jobs and just want to go ride our bikes and play in the woods and stick to the man for a few hours.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I disagree with the idea that we have a very hard time understanding scarcity and our personal impact on the world, instead we choose to ignore these things because they do not align with the comfortable lifestyles of convenience we have become accustomed to. This is why I am so big on the Indigenous concept of Relationality, as it places our existence on the earth as a relationship with everyone and everything else that's here. It teaches us how the repercussions of our actions extend far beyond our immediate surroundings. I think this idea is foreign to us as our society is focused on the individual, and not the well being of our environment. We generally do not take holistic views of ourselves, our communities, our societies or the planet. That needs to change, we need to start placing more emphasis on the relationships we have in order to understand the interconnectedness we share.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one. my response would take way to much time to type out. I do agree we need to examine our relationship with our environment, But….
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
When I say environment I mean much more than just the plants and trees, it’s our entire existence. We could understand scarcity, but most of us don’t want to because it means having to sacrifice convenience. Most people aren’t willing to do that, but we’re fine with sitting around while the place burns.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I got that and I do not disagree, BUT, I do not think we are hardwired to understand the implications of the fact that there are 8 billion people on earth, and the fact that the earth is in fact finite. I don’t think we are capable of truly grasping what that means.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I don’t think we’re hardwired to understand it either, but we definitely have the capacity to learn. Unfortunately our socialization teaches us to not think that, and this is why I have a fairly deep appreciation for the social aspects of Indigenous cultures, particularly those in what we call the PNW. Now I’m not saying that we completely adopt that ideology, however there are significant parts we can incorporate into Western ideology, particularly relationality, reciprocity and respect.
I brought it up because of how well it relates to the questions Dave brought forward, as well as your comments to Jerry about how building unsanctioned trails are illegal and they can and do have consequences.
cyclotoine
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Came here to say the fact that mark has no upvotes and the above has 12 explains while people are content to continue to put in unsanctioned trails until everything becomes unstable again as it was 20 + years ago and the whole thing needs to be renegotiated. Everything is cyclical including us, but out lives are so small in the overarching timeline of our cycle we struggle to comprehend it and thus have values that are more healthy. At least we "colonialists".
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
@cyclotoine, just to be fair I think it’s important to point out that Adrian’s post already had 12 upvotes by the time I posted my reply. I for sure believe and know there are people who will find my comment bs, but I also know there are some who won’t and others who will at least be open to exploring those ideas which are very different from the ideology we in Canada and the U.S. have been raised/conditioned with.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
It’s interesting that you think Mark and I are on opposite sides of this discussion.
“The truth about stories is, that's all we are. you have to be careful with the stories you tell. And you have to watch out for the stories that you are told.”
-Thomas King.
Reply
Jerry Willows
11 months, 2 weeks ago
no such thing as "illegal trails" if it's on crown land.... use the term "unsanctioned". Cypress so hot right now!
Reply
Mammal
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Agreed, and LOL
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
constructing trails on crown land with out authorization is a contravention of the forest and range practises act. so yeah, illegal. but there is really no one enforcing, for the most part.
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/consol31/consol31/00_02069_01#section57
Reply
Jerry Willows
11 months, 2 weeks ago
there's a difference in building and riding from a legal standpoint... can't get arrested/fined for riding on Metro/DNV managed crown land.
Reply
TristanC
11 months, 2 weeks ago
"“Youth” here refers to anything that happened more than three years ago, give or take."
Oof, I feel that. I've barely crested the ancient age of 30 and I cringe when I think about what kind of person I was five years ago, let alone ten or fifteen. I guess that's personal growth.
In the same vein, I'm pretty sure I'm a dickhead who doesn't know what he's doing 95% of the time, but being aware of that is worth something, right?
Reply
Jerry Willows
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I do find it funny when the term "unsanctioned" gets thrown around with "unsustainable". There are some 30 year old unsanctioned trails that are in great condition. Based on what I've seen, unsustainable trails don't get ridden after some time and get taken back by the forest.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I was thinking something similar. A few of the best unsanctioned lines I know have been around for decades. The original builders and ongoing maintainers know a thing or two about trail sustainability in a challenging environment, for sure.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Yeah, but let's not forget that a significant part of the reason unsanctioned lines are "sustainable" is due to the lack of traffic they get compared to busy sanctioned routes.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Can be true, and also not be true. There are certainly lots of great examples of well planned, built, and maintained and sustainable unsanctioned trails across the region, but there are also more and more fall line loamerrrut trails that seemingly keep getting stacked up within spitting distance of each other in more than a few places, which generally turn into rivers and hub deep babyhead filled ruts after the first winter.
Reply
earle.b
11 months, 2 weeks ago
There once was a time you needed a sharp eye to find the unsanctioned stuff. You HAD to really go looking for it, both entrances and exits. Seems this is long gone. Entrances and exits are skidded in straight onto and off the main climbing routes. No longer are these unsanctioned hidden gems. Etiquette has gone out the window, smash it hard in a feeding frenzy like a powder day on WB.
I don't take issue with most of these unsanctioned trails existing or us riding them. It's that too much of this on open display can jeopardize our increased access to create more sanctioned trails.
Reply
rotorburn
11 months, 2 weeks ago
This was getting really bad off of the Legacy climb train in Squamish. Loamers, a new one each week, just carved down the hill off the climb trail. Not even snuck in around a switchback, and no camoflauge. So of course they get trampled by everyone.
One of those loamers doubled back on the climb trail - except it pointed you DOWN the climb trail. I almost got taken out by a couple Italian tourists DH types. As I dodged them, they assured me that I was not, in fact, on a climb trail (that I'd climbed a thousand times) and that they were in the right.
I do miss the days where we'd make the entrance a couple hundred meters past any official trail, over a log and a couple rocks so we'd limit the onslaught at least a little bit. Sure, it's "gatekeeping", but I'd take that over what we have these days.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I have also been accosted by descending riders in that location, who were VERY EMPHATIC that I was an idiot and climbing the downhill trail....
Reply
Mammal
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I ride there all the time, and know the group you're referring to (made up largely of excellent riders and builders). I don't usually ride with members of that group, but when I do, it's always as you describe, wonder and awe over how I never knew such exploits were right in front of my nose. My crew refers to _ as the unofficial NS bike park, because so many of those trails are more solidly built and maintained than a lot of the sanctioned stuff, and there is such a vast rogue network.
I keep hearing rumors that they're pushing for certain parts of that network to become legitimized, and I've seen the beginnings of that over the past couple of years. But that's not going to be a solution to the issue you're mentioning, it may in fact push them away from what was previously rogue, to create something more to their scoff-law liking. And I pass no judgement about that, as I love that area just as it is, and I still feel the same feeling of wonder and enchantment when I discover (or am shown) something brand new. The exact same appreciation I've always felt that they've built those trails for people that know they're there, and I get to take advantage of that. I've also felt the same way you do about some of the entrances, exits, and connectors that don't need to be there, but I feel like it's now an entity all it's own, way huger in scale than any individual or group. It's like an understanding of abuse, and that's what feels wrong. I don't have a good solution.
I also have the same character flaw in immediately pointing out where a plan isn't going to work (again, Engineering related). I'm not usually asked for a solution, but badged a pessimist. I start out feeling like I'm doing the world a favor by warning them of the dead ends and failures ahead, and end up feeling like an asshole. Oh well, it's a skillset that helps and hinders, depending on the scenario and who you ask.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Timely article. In my two rides on the pedal only mtn this week I did a bit of exploring, once to the east and once to the west. In searching out some old lines that don't get ridden anymore a few new ones popped up. If you live for riding, then you know the experience and excitement of finding something new is almost as good as actually riding the new thing itself. I am decidedly torn on riding secret or unsanctioned trails though, especially ones in hot zones that are known to create tensions with land managers.
Part of the appeal of the secret trail is "finding" something new, being part of a limited cabal that knows about the trail and riding something that you're not supposed to. Part of the unease of riding hidden trails is knowing that I may be contributing to land managers removing support for legitimate trail projects. These feelings of pro and con have ebbed and flow over the years, with the help of self rationalization such as what PowellRiviera described earlier. However, most of us here can remember the time when there was a strong push to close trail en masse, so it pays to consider that we are only a few grumpy bureaucrats or elected officials away from losing access that we seem to take for granted. Yes in the grand scheme of things a few lines etched into the forest are pretty insignificant, but to others they may be very significant.
I think the best analogy is one that comes from my motorcycle riding group - time and place. There are times and places we can act like hooligans and there are times and places where it's just not that smart. Just like that last little exit trail Dave talks about, a poor choice of time and place can bring unnecessary heat that upsets our apple cart.
Reply
Jerry Willows
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I think Land Managers are starting to look at biking differently tbh.... how many millions have they spent on Interriver turf fields and all the other fields in DNV? How much do they spend on biking and what getting used more?
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I think there's no doubt anymore that mountain biking brings a net positive to the North Shore, whether you want to measure that in social impact or economic impact. Plus I agree that we've reached a point where we (mtb'ers) have to be considered more carefully. However, the reach public rec has far outstrips that of mtb'ing - it's not even close. We are still a fairly small drop in the public recreation bucket.
Reply
Jon Durnin
11 months, 2 weeks ago
We’re not a drop in the bucket. DNV trail count data shows bikers are the #2 rec user group on DNV land, second only to kids swimming lessons. More than soccer, pickle ball, tennis, or any other group. And the District puts about $0 into mountain biking and will continue that way until there is a new Mayor and a significant change in the power group on Council.
Speaking otr with LSCR staff, they are aware of virtually every unsanctioned trail out there, and given the current bike tech and that the trail trend is not dependent on wood structures a la Reaper etc., they know closing unsanctioned trails is practically impossible. Good lines will survive, and the blown out creek beds will be abandoned.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
@Jon Durnin I'll clarify a bit for you. When I said public rec reach I meant everything, looking at all public recreation. This would mean pools, arenas, rec centres, and yes fields/courts. Reach is the number of people that interact with the rec system. Go to Delbrook on a weekend and the place is packed pretty much all day for a variety of different activities.
I work in public rec and I just don't see the numbers stacking up comparing users visits to rec facilites and mtb users on the trails. While rec facilities cost big money to operate, they also bring in direct revenue, mtb doesn't do that.
I'd like to see your source info though - a quick google search didn't bring anything up for me.
Reply
Jon Durnin
11 months, 2 weeks ago
The data is internal DNV that I recieved in conversation around the last election from a city hall employee with access, I don't have it personally. I've spent enough time in the rec centers to know you're correct about total use, but as far as individual sport participation numbers go, I'll believe it. Remember, Bobsled is the single most ridden trail in the world, according to trailforks, the counter there backs that up. Revenue is another matter, but just because riders don't (currently) pay a trail use fee as a golfer at Northlands might, it doesn't mean it's not a community amenity that should be funded to some degree. BC Parks had a paid trail building crew of university students at one time called the "E-team", but that hasn't existed since 2001. Bring that back.
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
@JD - that's what I was initially thinking, that it was some sort of internal data. There have been some numbers run in the past using trail counters, but the accuracy of that data is questionable as it can't be delineated at all and it's hard to know if the counts themselves were manipulated - ie the same user walking past a counter multiple times. The one advantage to rec facility data is that it's far easier to catergorize due to the way it's collected - including user fees. I'm curious to know how the DNV data was collected - maybe I'll ask around next time I'm at work.
Yes, as a single user group mtb'ers are probably high on the list, however the Shore trails draw users from across the region (which has bsenefits), so that skews interpretation of the data. If we were to do a comparion on mtb'ers against other activities across the region I believe our position would drop quite a bit. So that brings me back to my drop in the bucket comment, when we zoom out and look at a much bigger picture we're a small user base on the public landscape.
Now I'm definitely not saying we don't deserve funding, quite the opposite in fact, but the reality of multiple land managers makes that difficult. There ABSOLUTELY has to be better input from gov't agencies, but how do all the players contribute to that funding though? You're probably aware of the work that goes into setting capital expenditures and budgets, and who gets what chunk of the pie. A lot of different things go into that, not only data from usage but also public perception. We have to include the political aspect and what elected officials will act on when it comes to public rec. Does the voter base see funding for mtb trails as much of an issue as a new pool, skating rink or community centre? That's the public reach I'm thinking about, and in that bucket I don't think we've hit the critical mass yet within the DNV to push funding to where it needs to be. Yes like Jerry said things are changing and I've had some great convos with DNV staff that makes me hopeful for the future, but I don't think we're quite there yet.
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
agree with both of you about importance and levels of use, but, I'm not sure how relevant that is, necessarily to the issue of unrestrained building in dense trail networks.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I think it relates to the psychology of trail building and use - something you alluded to in your response to Lee. I feel it's also directly related to my earlier comment about relationality in disagreeing with Adrian - we do not take the time to consider how our actions as individuals fit into the fabric of the whole of mtb'ing. All this little issues may be separate from each other, but they are not isolated. In short, most riders don't take any ownership of or responsibility for the trail network. I've been lucky enough to meet, talk to and learn from some of the best when it comes to ownership and responsibility, and we definitely need more of these people. I think about how amazing things could be if even 50% of the riding public had just a quarter of the ownership that select group does.
Reply
PowellRiviera
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I worked forestry for 20 years all over this country, the hand wringing over trails doesn't even register for me. People need to zoom out.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Please elaborate if you like! Opinions from differing perspectives on issues like this only make the discussion more interesting.
Reply
PowellRiviera
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I'll bite a little :)
Working mostly in government (including 5 plus years in industry) I saw a lot of large scale disturbances to crown land. Misuses of tenures that have been held by industry for over 80 years. So many poor practices and setting the bar so low in regards to best practices and ecosystem/species management (never mind old growth). I briefly worked for the crown supervising oil leases as well.
The tiny amount of disturbance that trails cause compared to industry (and urbanization for that matter) and the fact that the trails are most often beside huge disturbances already (cities, towns etc) make it a non issue for me.
Canada's entire history is based on extracting the natural resources wealth (fish, forestry, mining, farming) on this land. That's it, that's what the whole system is geared for.
Mountain bike trails and their impacts are so small compared to the standard operating procedures of how we extract from our landbase and our oceans.
It feels like we've lost the plot when I hear about the hurdles it takes to get trail approvals. Zooming out gives us perspective.
And building and riding trails is good for us. It's healthy. It's good for the soul.
Reply
Kever
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Agreed, but in the case of this article I feel like it is about optics and location. An abandoned line that turns into a watercourse is unsightly, and visible to many users due to the popularity of the North Shore mountains. People are more likely to react to something in front of them rather than something far off, perhaps because they believe they can change it. In terms of location, the easily accessible nearby forest is a much more scarce resource than a far off place, so people react more significantly to changes locally.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Thanks, Powell Riviera and Kever - I think you both make good points, and it's always valuable to use multiple perspectives when weighing an issue.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I have this conversation with the foresters I work with all the time. In the time it takes me to get a trail approved, (3-5 years) they can layout a block and associated roads, build, harvest, cleanup, plant, rehab and be many more of those cycles in.
on the flip side, I was at a rec planning symposium of sorts recently, and some of the motorized groups were complaining about the approval process, how slow and complicated it is, and how it will only lead to more unsanctioned trail building. The rec officer comment was basically, “oh yeah, I am not sure that’s possible” as in no amount of approvals are going to slow down unsanctioned trail building.
where I think most trail builders and small organizations struggle is in planning. If you know that it takes 3-5 years to get an approval, you had better always have something in the works. I am currently sitting on a rock, looking over a lake, laying out a trail I don’t expect to build for 3-5 years. but I am in the rare position where I get paid to do this. we have come along ways in 20years.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Generally speaking, I think this is a valid perspective when applied broadly on the landscape. Where I think it's failing, however, is that in more than a few locations the sheer quantity and density of trails, especially in suburban/crown interface areas, is starting to make me reflect on the impacts of trails and use on the environment, because trails and use as a whole has changed so much and we haven't necessarily adjusted to that reality, imo.
I think this is less evident in more rural areas of BC, but in North Van, Squamish, parts of Whistler, etc, trails in certain networks have spider-webbed into dense sprawling networks that are taking up more and more of the forests, and while I think traditionally low density networks don't have that much impact on wildlife movement or foraging, that becomes less so the more people and trails we jam into forests. I analyzeda property in Squamish that was 1km2 of area, it had at that time 2 years ago nearly 20km of trail on it...I think by almost anyone's metric that is excessive, and it isn't isolated to that one property and can be easily seen by looking at heat maps of networks across networks near towns in southern BC.
Sure, even then, probably not as bad as forestry, but that's a pretty low bar to meet and I think we as a user group need to do better to head off the environmental battles that I have been seeing poking their heads out over the past few years. We can't ignore our own actual or potential impacts just because some other industry groups are worse and get away with it.
Reply
Mark
11 months, 2 weeks ago
@Todd - BAM! Drawing a comparison to someone/something else that's doing things worse as a way to justify or rationalize one's own actions is an inherently flawed way of thinking.
Reply
rotorburn
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Good point. I spent most of my early riding days in Halifax worried about the "damage" to the trails.
Then the city council made a secret deal to swap the pristine parcel of land that had the trails on it to a developer. Within a few years that whole place had been blown to bits and gorgeous granite bluffs turned into parking lots and shitty apartments.
The same thing has slowly happened to me in most of the places I've lived. A few ribbons of trail in the front country really doesn't register when compared to the kind of things going on elsewhere. Etiquette is good, as is ensuring friendly relations with other trails users, but it's easy to go way too far with this.
Reply
Coiler
11 months, 2 weeks ago
100%. I am a forester and this always comes to mind for me as well. A good example is what is happening on Burke Mountain, where crown land was sold to a developer that is almost completely deforesting the area to build mcmansions, which includes removing bike trails that have been there for years.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I have so much to say on this issue as a couple of my trail issue minded friends are well aware, unfortunately my time to elaborate on it at this point is too limited so I just wanted to say thanks for bringing this up, Dave...this is actually an important and much needed discussion in our sport right now in more than a few places in the region. I'll try to get back online this evening to contribute some more thoughts for discussion!
and also, hell yes! to NP! what a great band, I've got a huge soft spot for Neko Case particularly, such an incredible voice!
Reply
Lee Lau
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Like to hear your thoughts on this Todd
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Well, were to begin? I guess I generally agree with a bunch of things people are saying here, but also think that as much in life, there's a lot more nuance to most things and they are never as binary as we'd likely prefer. I 'generally' agree that trails are overall less impactful than resource extraction or development, so it can be rather infuriating at the hoops and processes trail development proposals have to go through given the impact differential, at least talking from a Provincial Crown land perspective. That isn't to say those processes are wrong, but they are typically inefficient, cumbersome, time consuming, and in some cases I've seen what I'd consider an unfair allocation of processing resources to certain places over others which leads to a LOT of frustration and animosity regionally.
I also think that generally speaking unsanctioned trails shouldn't automatically be attached to "bad" trails as Jerry mentioned, we can all likely name off dozens of well built, safe, actively maintained, yet unsanctioned trails that other than not being authorized, do not negatively impact the environment or other land use considerations. Most of the riding public has no idea as to the complexity of trail legality and status on most of our regional and local networks across the Province. In Whistler, for example, even though a significant amount of trails are maintained by WORCA through support with the RMOW, many of the trails people would consider 'legal' actually are not, ditto Squamish and many other places. The general riding public, also probably really doesn't GAF one way or the other as they look at them as a homogeneous resource.
That being said, I think there is also a divergence between thoughtful and well considered unsanctioned building, versus what we are seeing in some places, and I'm going to pick on Squamish here, like Diamondhead or Valleycliffe, or Alice Lake since I live here. In those places there is zero consideration for other trails or the environment, as we continue to see more and more trails jammed in close proximity to, over crossing and overlapping, other trails. In the case of Diamondhead we just see a continual procession of new, indistinct, generic fall line trails that get put in lined up one after another, they last a few months until the rains come when they quickly turn into fall line hub deep ruts with babyheads. Rarely does it seem that anyone take the time to pick a more sustainable line, little to no active maintenance, it seems rare that they are cleaned up and tweaked/improved them as they develop, no one fixes drainage issues. They just go over 20-40 m and build another one, taking up more of the forest, creating more sediment erosion, and making mountain bikers look like selfish assholes destroying the forest for their kicks.
IMO, the sad part is that most of these lines are indistinguishable from one another and all had the potential to be much more than mediocre copies of the other trails, if a bit more effort and care was put into line selection, water management, and active maintenance. BUT, in this day and age of instant gratification quantity over quality seems to be the name of the game. I think that is a good segue into the fact that there is an unwillingness, or lack of caring at all, about the land people choose to build on. Finding out ownership status, looking at environmental considerations, what are the historical and cultural uses of the area? Most people 'building' just want to quickly slash in a line to shred and I think that's one of those mountain biking culture things that many think is 'normal' given the number of high quality unsanctioned builds as mentioned above, a lot of newer 'builders' just don't put that much effort into thinking about, and those are the things that are reflecting on mountain biking negatively as a whole in some areas.
Have to wrap this up for now, but I think that leads into the motivation of building. I personally always look at the landscape, network, and how it interacts and think about what kind of trail development can add to the network, make new connections, or improve the flow between trails, how do you make the network interesting and satisfying to use? Then looking at land use, proximity to other trails and neighbourhoods, what's access like, how will people use this, will it create new use issues, etc. These are the boring things that I think aren't really being considered or thought about in the quest for new and more. But they are the things that prevent many of the other issues we've been talking about. There are lots of places to build taking these things into consideration, but they require inquisitiveness, exploring, getting off the beaten path, and not just going where others already have.
This doesn't even begin to touch on the issue of First Nation's rights and title/cultural issues, private property trespass for use and trail building, and the general public's insistence that they are owed continued access to other peoples property for personal recreation.
Ultimately I tend to agree with Adrian's comment "humans have a very hard time understanding scarcity and our personal impact on the world." Tragedy of the commons playing out in real time.
Reply
Lee Lau
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Thanks Todd. Agreed
Reply
earle.b
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Funny part is the most of the people that think about how a trail impacts and where it's needed are the ones trying to do it by sanctioned means.
I put in time several years ago to propose a new connector from the BP to the 2nd switchback on Fromme. Trail walks done with the land manager, yet it's still in limbo. Had I just gone and built it rogue we'd have it. Instead it's a longer waiting game to do it right.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
yup, and the other issue that raises, is that while people (Trail orgs) wait to do things "properly" there are lots of examples where unsanctioned building moves into those places and impacts those plans in the interim...happening in places in Whistler.
Reply
Lee Lau
11 months, 2 weeks ago
You and Brian know this as well as anyone so perhaps a tad vacuous ...... Change is constant.
Except with land managers where the rate of change is slowed down
Ben Rogers
11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment has been removed.
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
lol, serious? almost all the slab trails in alice lake area were built illegally on private property. just because they're on trailforks doesn't impart legal status. There continues to be a massive amount of unsanctioned building on crown and private property in Squamish.
Reply
Jason Wolfe
11 months, 2 weeks ago
What blows me away is the number of times I've seen large groups of riders lingering around the entrance/exit of an unsanctioned/unmapped/supposedly secret trail in plain view of any and all passers by. If you've discovered the trail by all means enjoy it, but FFS try to keep it secret. As others have said there's no etiquette anymore, even from those who ought to know better.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 1 week ago
subtlty and discretion are a lost art.
Reply
Velocipedestrian
11 months, 1 week ago
Do Unto Others got lost with them. The bro crews standing in the middle of trail intersections and footpaths near trails in my hood know they're the most important folks around.
Reply
SteveR
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Great article, Dave! Like others have commented- as an old grouch I despair at times about the short term "me" attitude of too many in our sport. Dig the hell out of hillsides in a local park to create features that will only become abandoned, eroded eyesores? Sure! We were only having fun, and look at the cool photos! Carve out a new unsustainable loamer where a trail that badly needs a bit of maintenance exists mere metres away? You bet! We'll have a great time roosting, until we don't, and then we'll just make a new one! And now you've got me going on my pet peeve- the worry that the e-revolution is paving the way for full motorization. I know- old guy shaking fist at clouds.
Thanks for the tune- never really got into the New Pornographers, but I've been a Neko Case fan for a long time, with Furnace Room Lullably being on high rotation on a recent Utah desert roadtrip.
Reply
Andy Eunson
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Here like many other places, the history of trails is that most are unofficial. As the sport matured and WORCA started advocating building and maintaining those trails became legit. But we still have builders doing things unpermitted. And by and large, those trails are as well built or better than official trails. But they are pretty much black and double black. I really don’t have any issues with this type of building. The permit process takes far too long than it should. It took over five years to get a permit to construct a sequence of intermediate trails adjacent to the Cheakamus Lake road. The forest there is second growth and had seen so called fuel management aka logging along most the length. It is a fantastic addition to the trail inventory. No idea why it took five years though. That’s one reason why so called rogue trails exist. And as the sport inevitably grows with e-bikes and the general popularity of bikes too, we need to look forward, way forward and start to think about the future. More riding requires more trails and more maintenance and more parking and other infrastructure. Or we start thinking about ways to slow growth and simply make things stable with no growth. Or rather than making more trails in a given area we spread out where possible.
In my old age I’ve become kind of anti growth. The politicians calling for more growth more growth only growing the economy and population is good. I think I see that starting to slowly change with young people though. Rather than "what’s the largest home I can afford" is perhaps starting to be "what’s the smallest place I can comfortably live with" .
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Far Out/Flashback took that long for a number of reasons, that didn't really have to happen, but we were playing by the rules we were being presented with and in the end the process took that long, unfortunately.
It's somewhat validating, however, to see that the importance and need for those trails was immediately realized and the passion with which the community came together to help build it out over the past few years. I personally have a lot invested into that project and can look at it with a lot of pride in what we are achieving with it.
Reply
earle.b
11 months, 2 weeks ago
The kids rode Far Out 1 and 2 up to Flashback 2 and 3 earlier this fall, great trail. Thanks for your work on that and effort put in by WORCA and the whole community.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Seb deserves a heap of kudos too! but thanks, Brian!
Reply
Andy Eunson
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Considering the logging that was proposed by the Cheakamus Community Forest people that would have obliterated a few trails (that plan has since been been altered) perhaps the permit process should take that potential into account? Some assurance that a few years of trail work won’t get obliterated by logging. Certainly if one builds under a powerline it should be expected that clearing will happen periodically and trails may be damaged.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
yeah, you'd think. The CCF is a whole'nother mess...and they've only pulled the 3 smaller ampm/IBT area blocks, seems SCAP/High Side has not been amended yet, not sure how or if they plan on avoiding impacts there.
and to be fair, I have no problem lobbying entities like CCF to avoid impacting existing trails regardless of their official status as there are lots of mitigation options, although I also believe that when one builds a trail without approval on crown land you can't be too indignant about it if and when it's impacted by other land use considerations.
Reply
GB
11 months, 2 weeks ago
To all trail builders .
Sanctioned or built with permits . The trails built with permits on the North Shore how many ? Ten trails maybe ?
Thank you for your dedication and passion. One if the only actions that does not involve greed or profit .
Peak baggers probably do more trail blazing than mountain bikers. Often finding our narrow tight natural looking " loamers "
Most people ride , hike Sanctioned trails .
Only the brave and partially demented ride the trails not found on trail forks .
My only request : hike your bike in. Carry your bike out . Leave the debris hiding the entrance and exit.
The monetary part of mountain biking annoys me . The passion of mountain biking feeds my soul.
Reply
SixZeroSixOne
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Good article Dave
At a slight tangent, it seems like a user on Open Street Maps is on a mission to map and name all trails on the NS, irrespective of the trail status.
So many "unsanctioned" trails are now popping up on many different mapping apps (including Trailforks and Strava) which use the underlying OSM data, so they aren't going to stay "secret" for very long.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
that's because OSM is user-sourced, and OSM doesn't know or care about the trail's legal status. it's the users that are blowing it up and publicizing them, and that goes back to the etiquette piece. Problem (generally) being, too many new users in the sport who don't know better, or GAF, and a society hell bent on personal fulfillment over the bigger pictures, every time.
Reply
Jerry Willows
11 months, 2 weeks ago
bikers are their own worst enemy...
Reply
SixZeroSixOne
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but the specific user I'm aware of justified adding the trail data to OSM on public safety grounds, meaning the maps need to reflect reality on the ground, and the legality or otherwise is irrelevant.
If someone is lost or injured, then they need to know the layout of the land so, for example, they can more accurately call in their position to 911.
I can understand that position
Reply
Jon Durnin
11 months, 2 weeks ago
As someone who rides solo 95% of the time, I’d like to be able to tell my wife where I’m going so if I don’t come home NSSR knows where to look. NSSR has the maps and trail knowledge, and probably the right names. I’d like to pass that on, rather than just say “first lap will be down darkside, second lap is 2 trails east of boogeyman”
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I just share my inreach tracking with my wife.
Reply
Jon Durnin
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Inreach is what, $500 per unit? Trail names on a map are free for all.
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I have a mini, granted it was a gift, but since not getting cell signals within close proximity to town is a reality of the sea to sky I find it reassuring to have with me either riding, hiking, dog walking, or driving on FSR's. Find my friend also is handy for that, but not as reliable given the cell coverage issues.
Reply
Curveball
11 months, 2 weeks ago
A very wise colleague once told me, don't come to me with problems, come to me with solutions. It was great advice that I've tried to incorporate into my life.
Reply
Dave Tolnai
11 months, 2 weeks ago
My comment was mostly written as a joke. However, I'd say there's a big difference between pointing out a problem that has existed for a long time vs pointing out the issues with a really bad plan that somebody has just come up with. With the first, sometimes it can be about making others aware of the root of an issue so that they can problem solve it themselves, and sometimes it's wise to come with a solution. "Come to me with solutions" sounds great, but can lead to incorrect solutions that are only looking at the problem from one side. I'm more of a fan of "come to me with options". "Under promise and over deliver" is another one that really gets me. I mean, why don't you just figure out what you're actually going to do and try to deliver that?
Figuring out the flaws in others plans is where I get really wound up, though. If somebody creates something that is not well thought out and bound to fail, it shouldn't be the job of others to convince people that it is flawed and develop solutions. Just do a better job to begin with. Which, is a whole topic in itself. It seems like we live in a world right now (perhaps we always have) where people come up with amazing technical "solutions", and then we have to live with the fiasco they've created.
Thinking about that a bit more, that's really what we're talking about here. Thinking out the consequences of things before acting. The increased number of riders has changed the potential consequences of building a trail, and we likely need a bit of recalibration.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
11 months, 1 week ago
unintended consequences of policy driven by ideology and ego is something I have to deal with way to often! lol
Reply
DadStillRides
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Preamble was unnecessary, but still entertaining. Not sure why you were self conscious about publishing this other than ensuring anonymity. I think you are spot on. Unsanctioned trails have their place and can be special in a way that sanctioned trails can't, but also need to be limited in their sprawl and built respectfully.. as much as one can building an illegal trail. Even if everyone basically agreed there would still be issues. The individualistic nature of unsanctioned trails makes them both unique and problematic.
Reply
Dave Tolnai
11 months, 2 weeks ago
One could argue that many of the words that I write are unnecessary.
Reply
Offrhodes42
11 months, 2 weeks ago
As I approach 50, so much of this sounds like me. I shake my fist at the clouds. The older I get the more I get annoyed at illegal trail building. As you have stated, we (the mtb community) should know at this point that pissing off land owners, private or public, only leads to closing, banning, downright hate towards us. The Kingdom Trails in VT lost out on a chunk of trails due to a group of a$$-hats feeling like they owned the trails...and the rumor is the landowner was verbally berated on their own property because they were snowshoeing (or something like that). It can take a very long time to get permission for building a trail, and that can be frustrating. What I would like to see in my local area is that people actually work on maintaining what we have so it lasts. Rant over.
Reply
Mammal
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Most of the areas he's directly referring to is on Crown land, but that doesn't mean there isn't a heavy overlap of behavior and concerns.
Reply
antrunner
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Just be glad surrons and their kind haven't made it up there. Down here in NorCal they are taking over trails and running all other users off the trails.
Reply
Curveball
11 months, 2 weeks ago
That's one of my biggest fears. That entitled e-dirtbikers will take over the MTB trails. I won't be surprised if they start showing up here in the northwest.
Reply
slyfink
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I am in a similar situation where I am, but see it from the opposite side of the mirror! ha! As mountain bikers here have become more numerous, it became untenable for the managers of the public land to ignore or exclude us. As a result, the local trail association has finally found traction in sanctioning and legitimizing many of the unsanctioned trails. The problem is that they have taken the old trails - the one's I've been riding for close to (or is that over?) 30 years now - and fully dumbed them down. Berms everywhere, filling in dirt between rocks and roots, and essentially making it easier to ride for people new to the sport and people moving into the developments that are being built on the periphery of the forest.
This might sound great, but for me and the people who have been riding these trails over the years, we've lost the magic and challenge of what made it appealing to us. So we've migrated - built new trails or connectors between old great trails, so we can still ride the stuff that drew us to the sport in the first place. I understand the challenge of trying to please everyone (I was involved in the trail association in its early days and know full well that trying to get mountain bikers to agree on anything is like herding cats), but if some level of cooperation/consideration could be given to the old timers instead of making everything a bermy blue trail, I think that would be go a long way.
All this to say, yes we undoubtedly need to evolve, but we don't need turn our backs entirely on the old ways either.
Reply
Dustin Meyer
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Broken Social Scene just played a show 2 hours from me and I didn't go. WTF is wrong with me.
Reply
Dave Smith
11 months, 2 weeks ago
It would have been humorous to redact more of the whole article. Or publish in dingbats.
Reply
Dave Tolnai
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I considered just a fully blacked out screen, like a redacted FBI file. Felt a bit hard to make a point without any words, though.
Reply
Ride.DMC
11 months, 2 weeks ago
What you posted allows for a fun game of "fill in the blanks". I'm not involved with or plugged into the local scene in any way (and don't care to be), but because the North Shore is one of my local riding areas I have a pretty good idea of the locations you are referring to, but not the people.
Reply
Kos
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Uncle Dave hits one out of the park!
Reply
leverfingers
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Yes. Good work. I’d like all the humans to disappear. But my mood is tempered by the calibre of the people who care enough to talk about this. And how much they care. Thanks guys.
Reply
GB
11 months, 2 weeks ago
You can't see any trails with Google earth . Not a significant enough impact .
Check out the famous and popular West Coast trail on Google maps .
To the right of the very thin line of pristine forest is a very wide swath of wholesale destruction . It's called logging . Easily seen from Google earth.
I personally see no environmental impact from trail building .
The last trail I built is used every day by hikers and dog walkers . Getting fresh air and exorcize.
No horrific land slides like the one that destroyed Mosquito creek in Noth Vancouver and flooded all the homes close to sea level. Caused by logging .
It's purely a insignificant eyesore to user groups other than mountain bikers .
Reply
Andy Eunson
11 months, 2 weeks ago
I get your point and agree that a trails impact is less than that of a clear cut or other development. But I can see many trails on Google Earth that are not hidden by forest cover. I can see the hiking trails in the alpine around Black Tusk. Go to Slickrock in Moab and you’ll see the tire rubber on the trails from space. Pretty remarkable really.
Reply
GB
11 months, 2 weeks ago
More if a reference to the trail enclosed in old growth forest . The illusion of pristine untouched wilderness observed from the west coast trail.
Observed from a satellite one can view a wide swath of clearcutting probably 100 meters wide . I don't think you could see the west coast trail from Google earth beneath the canopy of trees .
Reply
Dave Tolnai
11 months, 1 week ago
I guess if you zoom out far enough, nothing is a problem?
For the issue above, put yourself in the shoes of other users. If I don't ride bikes and there is a walk in a provincial park that I like to do, and all of a sudden there's a bunch of trampled bushes on the side and it's a bit of a mess, I'm going to be pissed off. My experience is lessened. Is it as bad as a clearcut? No. But it certainly is likely viewed as "bad" by many users. Explaining to them that there's a parking lot or a clearcut that exists that is worse probably won't help.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment has been removed.
PowellRiviera
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Oh man, thanks for that youtube video of that guy with the mohawk signing Myriad Harbour. That is legendary. Haven't listened the the NP for a while, such a good song.
Nothing wrong with being a straight talker, also makes life simpler not just harder. Ask me how I know.
Reply
Guy Elliott
11 months, 2 weeks ago
Riders are like Force users…
Reply
Please log in to leave a comment.