I have recently been looking into the history of walking trails, trying to find some
(still elusive!) details that answer a question or two that I have about a few local to
me. In doing so I have been looking through newsletters and articles mainly pumped
out by various walking groups and organisations.
Now, back in my native UK, walking trails as we now know them are a relatively new
entity. Yes, you have read that correctly. You see, for hundreds of years much of the
country was owned by the various Lords and Gentry. Bar the odd road (usually with a
toll!) there was no real way across much of what is, now, national park. Instead, this
land was closed to all public and kept as hunting ground or similar. For God forbid a
few riff-raff should startle a grouse or two over the hundreds of square miles of land,
on the 360ish days of the year that his lordship was not hunting.
However, come 1932 – with industrial reforms meaning many working class people
now had free-time and therefore wanted to spend it in the great outdoors - this was
causing problems. In the end, it led to the now infamous Kinder Scout Trespass. Yep,
trespass. Hundreds of working class walkers trampled up the highest point in the area
– Kinder Scout – in a show of mass disobedience. There were even several
altercations with the gamekeepers of the land owner on the way, as they tried to keep
the hordes from reaching their goal. These altercations ultimately led to several arrests
and ridiculous terms of imprisonment for several of those involved. It did, also, make
front page news of the papers and opened up huge discussions with regards to access
to lands and eventually to the establishment of what are now national parks – although
not until after the Second World War; red tape took just as long to cut through back
then, it seems!
But it was still not over, as it was not until 2005 – 6 short years ago! – that the CROW
(Countryside Rights Of Way) act was finally adopted into English Law and now
walkers enjoy access to an abundance of trails across the country.
Now, interestingly, Benny Rothman, the ringleader of the trespass, had actually spent
a great deal of time “illegally” exploring the areas he was fighting to gain access to by
bicycle. Basically, the champion of walkers trail access was an avid cyclist, as well as
walker. If only he had taken the bike to the top of Kinder Scout with him, then
perhaps the access battles would’ve encompassed bicycle use as well as foot traffic.
Instead, UK cyclists are denied access to hundreds of miles of footpaths, from a legal
stand point. And so the fight to redress that imbalance continues…
Back to Australia and the 21st Century, one of the many newsletters I scoured had a
brief article written by a member of a “Trails Access” sub-committee, recounting the
recent walk through an area of National Park that had no current trails, with a view to
seeking approval to construct one. The consensus was that the area could support a
trail and had great views of the river and the native wildlife that it supports. So that’s,
off trail, through native bush and therefore undeniably disturbing the native flora and
fauna, with a view to permanently altering the current state of this area by
constructing a trail. Is it just me or are those not the very things that are highlighted as
being problematic by many of the walking groups when it comes to seeking mountain
bike access to our parks?
In parks controlled land within the Adelaide metro area alone, there are currently
31.5kms of bike accessible tracks and trails as opposed to an estimated 500kms of
walking trails. All bike accessible tracks and trails are shared with walkers and only
4km is classed as trail – ie what isn't access track or firetrail!*. And so, how do many of us get to
know whether or not certain existing trails would be suitable for bike and/or shared
use, from a rider’s perspective, rather than a walker or bureaucrat’s one? How do we
decide that we should request access to?
Many of us ride them to find out, regardless of the current rule, just as Benny
Rothman did.
Now, I’m not advocating that we should ride every walking trail out there regardless
of the rules in place, or that every trail should be opened up to allow bikes on it.
But, when MTBers requests for specific trails are being lobbied against by walking
groups stating that areas are too sensitive to support such access – despite other trails
already being in place – but are prepared to walk unchecked through untouched bush
to look for new places to adapt to their own needs, I can only smile to myself and
shake my head.
And when walkers are crying foul of cyclists riding on a trail they shouldn’t be on –
where the major alteration of the surrounding landscape has already taken place with
a trail having already been put in place – yet the opposition have a vaunted history of
ignoring the rules of the day to reach their own ends, again, I can only smile to myself
and shake that head of mine.
The funny thing is I doubt the irony would be lost on Benny Rothman and his cohorts,
either.
* Numbers taken from “Linking Adelaide with Nature: A Trails Strategy Connecting
People with Adelaide’s Natural Areas”, South Australian Dept. of Environment and
Heritage, April 2010
