The Highest of Standards...

So, last time around I was loving singletrail and lamenting the fact that whilst progress is being made to access around the country, much of it focuses on the existing fireroad networks. Not much has really changed to be honest – I love the skinny, still try to avoid the fireroad where possible and don’t seem to be hearing of much singletrail being made available to MTBs.

Locally, however, some new trails in a Parks managed area are set to be built as shared use singletrail and actually formalise a few trails local riders have been using for years anyway – a very positive step, even more so given it links reasonably well to other shared use networks controlled by different land managers in the surrounding area. Anyway, part of the discussion with regards to this formalisation amongst riders has been about keeping the existing alignments, not pandering to the underlying feeling that seems too often to come from the risk adverse land managers, that all shared use trails have to be green or easier blue IMBA standard trails – especially when several new trails are to be built in this area, thus allowing for a bit of diversity without impacting anyone’s ability to get around and through this parcel of land.

What I find really intriguing about this is that it is the way the community are referencing that the nature of the trail is just as important as the fact that we have access – the exact thing I was trying to get at last time. Now, flow is a much spoken word in the trailbuilding world at the moment, but it really is the best descriptor. Fireroad is built for its primary purpose; to get from A to B and provide access where there otherwise would not be any. And that is fine and understandable. However, as trails built these days are about fun and enjoyment, not solely for practical purposes, then it makes total sense that each trail should serve to put a smile on face as you travel along it – and the flow is what gives the trail this characteristic.

Most of the talk of flow at present is in regard to IMBA-style Flow Trails; the rolling, swooping trails that make as much use of gravity as possible to give you your singletrail thrills. Beginners can ride and enjoy them just as much as expert riders can – just with speed adjusted according to ability. However, tight, twisty and technical is a different but equally valid type of flow, too. The important thing is that the flow stays consistent along its course or transitions in a non-intrusive way. Not an open, smoothly bermed, gravity assisted set of corners suddenly changing into barely handlebar wide trees, slippy roots with 180 degrees turns.

So, if the flow comes from this consistency, then it follows that the consistency has to come from having some sort of base standard for the type of terrain that the trail is situated on. And when it comes to standards, IMBA have really set them for MTB trails – and are leading the way in general too, with many land managers adopting these techniques for all trail construction – be it for MTB, walking, shared use or any other that doesn’t require heavier duty, road style construction.
Now, although that sounds a lot like blowing our own MTB trumpet, have a think about the trails you ridden. And in particular, the two extremes of that spectrum; your favourite trails and the ones where one ride was more than enough. The fun ones, even if not built in these IMBA standard times, generally show the same techniques and theories that IMBA promote; the flow will have you heading from corner to corner without the need to get heavily onto the brakes or the pedals between each turn; give you enough room through the corner to turn smoothly without resorting to Danny Macaskill style manoeuvres at every change of direction; give you options to challenge yourself by letting your tyres leave the ground or need to be precisely placed to continue without dismounting; they allow you to be prepared for what is coming, even if you don’t know exactly; they are consistent to themselves. The ones you dislike are the ones that show the opposite traits – full of steep steps or water bars on inclines that have you on the brakes or chewing the stem, depending on the direction you approach from; those zig-zag corners that are so sharp its hard work to get your bike around, even when you get off and walk them; basically, trails where the builders (like or not, often walkers!) have tried to conquer the terrain rather than work with it.

Additionally, every time a trail built to IMBA standard is laid down, holds up and lasts, it is another nail in the coffin of the argument that certain trails aren’t suitable for MTB use or that it is too hard to build trails that can accommodate MTBs. If we show that the standards used do hold up, then we get down to the nitty gritty, fact based aspect of the real argument; should there be a trail there or not? After all, if the unsuitable aspect is due to erosion or other user impact, then we can hold up, once again, the standards we use and the examples we’ve already constructed that prove otherwise. If the unsuitability is due to Flora or Fauna impact, surely any trail user, regardless of chosen method of use, would contribute to this? If the problem is due to other perceived issues – rider speed, risk of collision, for example – then, again, the IMBA standards accommodate the use of chokes, grade reversals and such to limit these – something that other standards do not address, leaving the problem unsolved ; if this is not enough, it does at least provide the positive of being able to show the willingness to work with land managers based on evidence and fact, rather than just demanding access with no provision in overcoming any of the concerns that the land managers may have.

So, in terms of land access, what does this mean?

We have to keep fighting for appropriate access – not only singletrail, but the right singletrail. The singletrail that gives us great riding, but which also shows that MTBs are appropriate for use on the trails. And if we get the opportunity to build some new stuff, we have to do it in way that shows the practicality of the standards we so often refer to when lobbying for these opportunities; use the standards appropriately and we have trails that are sustainable, in terms of the trail itself and in terms of giving riders something fun, enjoyable and worth riding so as to stop some elements of our community from going and building their own inappropriate stuff elsewhere instead, which ultimately helps no-one.

And if we can build trails that keep us happy by being fun to ride on, whilst also keeping the land managers happy by reducing the problems they may have envisioned or previously encountered, then we open up more opportunities elsewhere for trail access and chip away at getting further trails green-lighted for MTB use. And that is what we all want.

VIVA LA SINGLETRAIL - Pictorial!

A few great shots from my friend Brian over in Colorado, taken at Fruita... Love That Singletrail!

VIVA LA SINGLETRAIL!

Fireroads can be really boring.

After various hold ups en-route to a recent ride, combined with the “exploratory” nature of the first section of the ride making for slow going, my riding buddy and I called it early and bailed down a familiar fireroad and back to the car. We’ve ridden this fireroad before and, in fairness, when ridden in our usual fashion, the high speed descent it provides is a welcome change to the long grind preceding it and is kind of fun in its own way.

But not on this night. Sure, it was riding bikes which is a far superior option to watching Saturday evening TV, there were several ‘Roos to say ‘Hi’ to, the creek was flowing and gurgling for the first time a long time after the first Autumnal rain; it was certainly better to be out on the bike than not riding. But after the excitement and a little drama with some of the navigational decisions we’d had to make on the way in, a bit of bush bashing along overgrown and somewhat forgotten trail giving way to pretty cool views over the lights of Adelaide, the fireroad descent left me feeling a bit numb. Especially as our intended descent was one of the prime singletrail descents from the hills to the plains. The ride just sort of fizzled away; it was a ‘boring’ finish, not one that that had you contemplating a quick climb back up the hill for another go.

So, singletrail is where it’s at for me. I’m sure many of you feel the same. There are times and places that firetrail or road linkages are needed; feedback from the Kona Dirty Weekend 24 hour held in the Adelaide Hills over Easter asked for a bit less singletrail, which makes sense when the sleep demons are attacking at 3am and you need a chance to eat and drink more easily than the singletrail allows, but outside of racing, let singletrail reign.

Yet, if we are not careful, we may very well end up with access to our parks and reserves only in the form of firetrails.

For various reasons, walkers are less opposed to bikes on firetrails than singletrail and Parks departments seem to follow this thinking, too. For Parks accountants, providing access within their budgetary constraints, it is a low cost option – no construction costs, with upkeep covered by fire management practices as is – which surely makes it attractive.

For walkers, it is a “safe bet” in the politics of trail access. The longer sightlines fireroads provide appear to make them a ‘safer’ option in many walkers’ eyes, who often quote ‘risk of collision’ as a major concern. Yet the direct nature of their routing and lack of Technical Trail Features (by their very nature) to prompt much in the way of speed control, means even the most inexperienced of riders can gather a lot of momentum very quickly. Conversely, the rises, falls, twists and turns of singletrail generally keep a rider’s speed more manageable, (even though you feel fast due to the enclosed nature of the trail) should other users be encountered.

With higher speeds surely resulting in greater drama should rider hit trail or – worse still – hit another trail user, surely the risk on firetrail must, in balance, equate to that perceived by other in regards to singletrail? With less technical challenge to keep rider’s interest in the trail, what will stop ‘boredom’ creeping in, leading to the use of non-designated trails in search of such challenge? Or worse yet, start building unauthorised trails to provide the challenge they seek?

When considered in this way, you start to wonder; Are we making headway with access to Parks? Or are we being set up to fail due to the lack of singletrail access being offered?

I know I welcome access to our Parks – absolutely, I do! – but I will continue to do what I can to get more singletrail onto the agenda, however many obstructions presented. I’d rather we had 10km of quality singletrail than 25kms of fireroad – though ideally I’d want more of both!

So, whilst I’ll ride this aforementioned ‘boring’ fireroad again at some point in the future, I reckon the few small sections of singletrail we scouted on our ride will win out more often than not. Whilst we may get some form of access to our Parks, we must keep on keeping on for the singletrail access we all want and not give up, however hard it may seem.

Viva La Singletrail!

This is why...

Gotta love a bit of Mint Sauce - "the Eternal wreak of damp wool"


http://www.thisiswhy.co.uk/

Burnside Mt Osmond Fire management plan response

A strange one this; supposedly a fire management plan, yet enough references to recreational trails - with negative MTB slants - to make you wonder.

This is a draft and may or may not yet be use by IMBAA...

Given the dramatic events of the 2009 Victorian bushfires, it is re-assuring to see council are looking for ways to pro-actively reduce the bushfire threats posed around the Mt Osmond area, using the recommendations and research resulting from the enquiry into the causes and handling of those events.

Safety of the CFS/MFS crews and local residents that would be directly affected by any fire in the area has to be the number one priority. The plan appears to take many positive steps in this regard.

However, we note that the plan also makes reference to the track and trail network within the area and the recreational opportunities that it provides. Yet there is a recreational trail plan which council has not released for public comment or officially adopted and those opportunities are not directly linked to fire management – the focus of this plan.

That said we are concerned with the language and attitude displayed by those comments within this plan towards Mountain Bike (MTB) use of the trail network. Their seems to be a lack of understanding of the wants and needs of the MTB community and a consequent dismissal of those wants and needs, despite the apparent amount of MTB traffic currently using the existing network.

With Eagle Mountain Bike park nearby and DENR adopting IMBA trail building and management techniques with a vision of creating and allowing for MTB experiences within neighbouring Cleland Conservation Park, as well as other parks across the State, there will not be an end to MTB use of the Mt Osmond reserves simply by saying “No” to MTB use. The current already usage shows this.

We would suggest that a pro-active, shared-use management approach is observed. Locally, Mitcham has turned just such an apparent “problem” into a resource, with volunteer help provided by the MTB community in particular, and has thus had success in reducing unauthorised MTB use in other reserves within their remit.

We would strongly advise council to maintain separation between this plan and the recreational trail plan; furthermore, it should be high on the list of council’s priorities to review the recreational trail plan that was drafted in 2004 and open it for official public consultation. The current situation of incrementally implementing a plan still in draft – and thus without any public feedback - displays a lack of understanding of the wider community desires by council and will only maintain the current, less than ideal situation for all trail users, which has potential to need more drastic actions to rectify in the future, as MTB use continues unmanaged.
We are more than happy to offer specialist advice and expertise to council with regards to shared use trail networks in order to provide a sustainable outcome for all trail users, whilst still maintaining the management practises that council is proposing within this fire management plan.

Mr IMBA Australia

Mr IMBA Australia; A chat with Nic Bowman.

I recently caught up with Nic to have a bit of a chat about a few things pertaining to
South Australian trails, so also took the opportunity to ask a few questions of him – as
a mountain biker, as well as Mr IMBA Australia.

So, how did the MTB thing all start for you?
BMX…I used to ride that around the city, then in the late 80’s, Dad got an MTB that
we could share. It was one of those old big 20 inch frame things. So started out trying
some fireroads on that, then also had a bit of time on a roadie, but all my mates were
then MTBing. Used to just ride to the top of the range, then bomb back down the most
interesting way we could find. I reckon my first MTB was bought around ‘94

And how did this lead to trail building?
We used to do lots of bushwalking with Dad as kids, so wanted an outdoors job really,
so I studied Enviromental Science with the intention of becoming a Park Ranger,
specialising in Sustainable Trails. This was around the same time as MTB was really
becoming a passion for me, so I had a final year project that involved a MTB trail
system in one of NSWs parks. Then, I was advocating independently for bike access
for a while, until the Bicycle SA (BSA) job came up to establish the SA State MTB
Plan. I missed out on the job, but assisted Rod Worthington during the planning
process and then implementation. In 2002, I took over at BSA as the MTB Project
Officer. It was all somewhat unique that I came from a management perspective and
then learnt to love building, rather than the other way around, which seems more
commonplace.

What was you first trail building experience?
Again, strange as it was legal! I think it was at Prospect Hill, with Adelaide Mountain
Bike Club (AMBC), where I got to put theory into practise. My first designed and
built trails were out at Fox (Fox Creek AKA Cuddlee Creek); “Outcrops” and
“Immaculate Compaction” (which some locals also call “Natives”)

Do you have a favourite trail building tool?
The pick-mattock – a very versatile tool.

What is you favourite trail to ride – locally, nationally, internationally?
Umm… so hard… Blue Gums at Eagle MTB Park, locally. I didn’t build it, either! I
only marked out the initial line, then others interpreted that, which is interesting. It
has a bit of everything… Steep Track (at Fox Creek) as the armouring is so good from
a build perspective and a fun trail, too.
Glen (Jacobs)’s new trail, “Stonefly”, at Mt Buller is awesome and could be
Australia’s first IMBA Epic trail. The Klinsporn is amazing too; old but benched in,
techy little rock gardens and a long, long descent. Forrest lives up to the hype, WA
has some totally unique stuff… Victoria in general has a lot of good quality trail.
Fruita, Moab obviously and I was impressed with the stuff around Park City, Utah.
But I’ve still yet to get to Whistler, the European Alps, the UK… So much still to
ride!

Which trail project are you most proud of so far? Why?
Definitely Fox Creek – so far! Mitcham was an interesting mix of frustration and
success being the first local council in Adelaide to get behind MTB.

What’s been the biggest obstacle you’ve overcome so far? Still to surmount?
Not sure… Good question! Moving NSW Parks forward in terms of developing MTB
access policy and seeing the release of the discussion paper is a big deal – it
potentially affects so many riders. Generally assisting the hard work of all the great
local advocates in moving that NSW access forward… though it could still take
another 5 years of work if SA is anything to go by!

IMBA Australia is unique in that the funding so far has come from MTBA – a racing
body. Has this affected or influenced what you do and how you do it?
It does present challenges in that the board I answer to are from a racing background
unlike in Canada, the US, Europe… Their purpose is to allow for a consistent
standard of racing; maintain organisational standards for racing nationwide; provide
the necessary insurance for Australian MTBers to participate in such racing and,
ultimately, provide pathways to the elite level of the sport. Helping local clubs
manage access to, and potentially create, venues that can be used for racing – well, at
that level, it is easy enough to understand the need for IMBAA and so it isn’t so
diametrically opposed to the board’s racing focus. It’s still an evolving relationship,
especially as the board changes with elections, but overall it’s working well. Once
IMBAA has been around longer and is more self-sufficient, that will help, too.

You’ve attended a few IMBA World Summits now – what has been the biggest or
most important thing you’ve learnt from them?
I guess seeing the models from Utah where land developers have to include trails in
their new sub-divisions. It’s been shown over in the US that being close to trails in
this way has actually proved desirable and increases land value, rather than
depreciating it. Retirees are moving to be closer to trails, not golf courses! Hopefully,
well, eventually, that will happen in Australia, too.

Are there any particular trail builders or advocates that you admire or are inspired by?
Glen Jacobs, Daffyd Davies, Joey Klein. All different approaches and all different
trails, but all have achieved so much.
Glen is so creative, quite the visionary in terms of the actual trail in the dirt and just a
very likeable guy too.
Daffyd is a mastermind, especially at the high strategic level - his vision at that level.
(Note; Daffyd is the man responsible for the forestry trail centre model developed in Wales, and now used across the UK - and the world - to varying extents. He was initially offered the IMBA Australia role that Nic now holds, but was unable to accept due to family constraints.)
Joey is just inspiring. He sells mountain biking better than anyone. He has the ability
to turn a boardroom full of hostile folks into a group of passionate MTB advocates –
it’s what happened at Mitcham Council! He’s been on the road for 12 years for
IMBA, yet still stays positive.

Which trail project do you wish you’d been involved with but weren’t or haven’t
been?
Stromlo! I went with Trail Solutions for the initial inspection and trail consultation,
but ultimately Glen Jacobs and his crew at World Trail beat us to the contract.
Otherwise, I would’ve happily moved to Canberra for a while and who knows where
that would’ve led.

What is exciting you the most at present – ski resorts, parks access, trail centre type
experiences, urban trails, etc.?
Australia is doing ok with the trail centre model; we are way above the US for
example on that front, but are so far behind on the shared use trails. Park restrictions
are a huge thing here – it’s crazy! Telling people – particularly younger riders – that
we can’t share, nor go into a park because we ride a bike, has to be looked at and
resolved. So, although frustrating at times, the potential that is involved in opening up
that type of access and what it’ll mean; that’s exciting.

You see a lot of projects around the country – do you think any one state or region is
leading the charge or moving ahead in terms of trail development?
WA – on policy, trail standards and volunteer involvement, they are way in front and
it’s reflected in the trails being built over there. Having said that, Victoria has an
extensive amount of accessible, quality trail, which is hard to beat. Tassie has a solid
base and is tying it together with the tourist trade well which will help drive the
progress forward. SA could jump to the front of the pack though if they can finally
sort out parks access – but it’s been 10 years of negotiations already. If they did, then
they’d have parks, forestry, local council, and State Government supported trails.
That’s what IMBAA is aiming for in all states and territories.

Lots of places and people seem to be into pumptracks at present – what do you think
will be the next big thing in trail design or particular features?
Hans Rey came up with the terminology, but I feel it’s what Glen Jacobs has been
building it for a while; Flow Country. That’s an IMBA trademark, by the way! Flow
trails are what we’re pushing for, wherever terrain allows. They are just so fun to ride.
The harder you push and faster you go, the more fun they become.

A lot of media attention goes to New Zealand, especially in the Northern Hemisphere,
why do you think Australia doesn’t get as much? Is our trail infrastructure that far
behind?
The trails? No. The rest of the package? Yes. Bar for Noosa, Cairns, Far North
Queensland, hospitality and tourism is a fairly small piece of the economic pie - we
are still a nation based on primary industries and mining – compared to New Zealand.
They tie it in to the other adventure sports and eco-tourism much better than we do.
The little things like clear signage, quality trail maps, bike washes, bike friendly
accommodation… we need to up that side of things, then package it up and sell it.
International flights direct to Rotorua help NZ, too. Maybe if Cairns or Canberra get
direct international flights it will change.

Where do you think will be the next “must ride” area in Australia? We’ve seen
Forrest, Melrose, Margaret River all make plays for the title of “#1 MTB destination
in Australia” to some greater or lesser extent, where else is going to vie for that?
Mt Buller is putting big money forward to be the Whistler of Australia. There is a
green DH trail planned to go in, which is unique and will be a great addition to the
other trails World Trail has built over the last few years.
Mt Joyce Recreation Park (venue of the 2011 Marathon Nationals) is going to have a
$1million trail network and will also incorporate horse riding, kayaking, something
for everyone.
Atherton Tablelands near Cairns has a plan for a four day loop… and each node or
stopover point will be a trail centre in its own right.

What is the biggest thing your average MTBer can do to really push and get trails on
the ground; essentially, how can we help IMBAA to help us?
To contribute – be it time or money. Time to dig or advocate locally is a huge one –
IMBAA can’t fight every battle, but can support local work as much as possible. If
you can’t donate time, a few dollars to IMBAA so that we can is the next best option.
When the website re-launches there will be an option to do this.
Getting organised is a big thing too; IMBAA has started to help as a focal point, but
we need to increase our organisational standing as a complete community. CORC is
an anomaly in this respect, but given the folks in Canberra are surrounded by so much
government, there are those organisational skills in large volumes which can be
harnessed. Time is perhaps somewhat more available too, due to the regimented
working hours that go along with those government jobs, compared to those in more
regional areas and their associated industries. However, the amount and quality of
trails around the Canberra area stand testament to what highly organised use of time
and resources can achieve.
I guess also, stop whinging! (NOTE: Although said with a smile, Nic is also serious,
and, I feel, warranted, in saying this!) Use that time to actively help instead! There are
too many threads of complaint on Rotorburn and not enough folks out shovelling dirt
to get things right. Just look at the stuff about Lysterfield - which is a big IMBAA
project at present – and the number of riders vs. the number of people out helping.

Anything else you’d like to pass on?
The glass is only half full – we have lots of exciting possibilities ahead, but they do
take work to achieve them, so don’t give up. “Relentless optimism” is needed.

Also, IMBAA, MTBA and Mountain Biking in general need to go “mainstream” to
really grow. We can make it to TV adverts jumping over cars, and currently lay claim
to 3 World Champions, yet can’t get a 2 minute segment of Worlds, hosted here in
Aus, on Sports Tonight or a similar mainstream media outlet? If we can’t change that
in the next couple of years we will have missed a huge opportunity on all fronts –
from athletes earning a living to legitimising the need for trails in parks. Once upon a
time, skateboarding was banned everywhere, nowadays every local council has a
skate park. That’s the kind of mainstream I mean and we need to work towards
achieving for MTB so that we can grow and sustain an industry.

I also really want to see the bike brands get behind trails and support the development
and growth; there is no need for mountain bikes if we have nowhere to ride them, no
races without trails, so I want to get the brands, importers and distributors working
with us and to get involved more with trail access for every rider; it’s a huge part of
the IMBA model overseas and I hope to work with the brands to grow that here, too.
It’s a longer lasting benefit than a new set of tyres if you are talented enough to make
the podium, so it provides more for them in return, too.

Ok, to finish, some rapid fire questions!
Rock or Wood?
Definitely rock.

Fast and Flowy or Tight and Techy?
As there isn’t enough, tight and techy.

Down, down, down, or up, across and around?
…I’ll say up, across and around.

Flats or SPDs?
SPDs
Full suspension or fully rigid?
If I can afford it, suspension.

Chairlifts, a shuttle or hike-a-bike?
I’m not really up for pushing, so lifts or shuttles.

Pumptrack or Dirtjumps?
Definitely pumptrack.

Lycra or Baggies?
These days, baggies.

Legal or cheeky?
Ha! Legal.

Walkers or horseriders?
Horseriders; more of a cowboy style, give-it-a-go type attitude. Unfortunately, a lot of
walkers I have to deal with come across a bit snobby…

DENRs Parks and People; A response for IMBAA

A few weeks back, I was asked by Nic Bowman at IMBA Australia to put together a response for the above plan. Here it is;

People and Parks; A Draft Strategy for South Australia’s National Parks and Reserves.

The overall vision of increasing the sustainable use of our parks, reserves and open spaces by a wider and more diverse range of users is a positive step by the Department.

However, given the fact that the Department has long recognized that the Mountain Bike community is worthy of stakeholder status in prior dealings over the last 10 years, it is disappointing that there appears to be only minimal provision of specific Mountain Biking opportunities within the strategy. Given the apparent positive progress of recent ATPAG meetings and feedback from other recent releases by the Department, this is somewhat disappointing and was not as expected.

Mountain biking can easily and readily fit into, and support, all five of the guiding principles of the strategy.

“Everyone involved in recreation and tourism should help protect the natural and cultural values of parks”

The Mountain Bike community has developed and promoted a vast number of sustainable practices, promoted by the International Mountain Bikers Association (IMBA) in the areas of trail design and maintenance and the continual reinforcement of the ‘Rules of the Trail’ throughout the trail user community and the Mountain Bike community in particular. Many of these practices and standards have been adopted by the Department for use within the parks and reserves under its control.

“Everyone should have the opportunity to enjoy and learn about parks”

“Everyone” should therefore make no discrimination of user due to their chosen method of transport. Whilst it is accepted that not every track, trail or indeed park or reserve can support Mountain Biking, many can. Ignoring the wants and needs of the Mountain Bike community will only continue the status quo of unwanted, unauthorized and in some cases nuisance Mountain Bike use within our parks, particularly within the greater Adelaide Metropolitan area.

“South Australians have a responsibility to contribute to the long-term protection of parks”

The South Australian Mountain Bike community – indeed, the global Mountain Bike community – have shown, and continue to show, willingness to work with land managers to maintain the areas to which we have access. Locally, Eagle Mountain Bike Park, Cudlee Creek Forestry Reserve and Mitcham Council’s shared use trail network are readily working examples of such input.

“Parks are an integral part of the landscape and play an important role in supporting healthy, vibrant and prosperous communities”

For parks to actively promote healthy communities, the need to be open to the variety of pursuits that the community seeks to engage in to achieve this goal. Mountain biking and cycling in general readily provide such an opportunity for our communities and as such should be encouraged where appropriate within the parks system. To be prosperous, they need to be able to draw a diverse range of users; this too comes from offering a diverse range of potential uses.

“Decisions about the way parks are used should be based on evidence and risk assessment”

Decisions based on evidence should be the only way decisions are made, when evidence is available. As such, the available evidence points strongly in favour of Mountain biking being an appropriate activity within our parks when planned and managed correctly. This evidence has been continually presented to the Department in prior engagement.

In addition to the overall principles, the following points are also of note;

Parks in the Flinders Ranges region – particularly Mount Remarkable – would vastly benefit from specific Mountain Bike planning. The Department and other land managers have already invested in various degrees of infrastructure in the region and this could be readily built upon to enhance their usability by the Mountain Bike community and achieve the desired increase in user numbers to the region.

From page 5, “…looking to visit…for…recreation…” The recreation opportunities need to be expanded if you are to achieve your own targets of visitor numbers. Mountain biking and cycling can be readily incorporated in many areas to provide diversity beyond the walking and picnicking options currently available in the majority of cases.

On page 6 there are the points regarding the recognition of trends and the changing needs of the community. Mountain biking has long been recognised as a trend and something the community wishes to pursue within the parks system but these needs are still yet to be adequately met. Furthermore, the later mention of taking “a cautious approach” to changes has arguably been applied to excess with regards to Mountain Bike access within the parks network to date.

On page 17, Action 1.3 calls for the investigation into the Lofty Ranges with regards to establishment as a nationally recognised cycling destination. This should be expanded to also include the Flinders Ranges. Furthermore, it should be pursued and implemented. This would be potentially an ideal conduit for the Department to work with outside commercial enterprise to achieve, if deemed prohibitively expensive for the Department to achieve alone. In addition, Action 1.5 should be expanded to include multi-day trails for Mountain Bike users as well as walkers (who already have numerous trails of this type to choose from) and this aspect incorporated into the investigation suggested in Action 1.3.

On page 19, Action 3.3 seeks an event within the Lofty Ranges to engage a younger audience in particular. Mountain Bike events are often held within the ranges and could be tailored to provide such means for the Department. The often maligned “thrill seeker” aspect of Mountain biking raised in previous consultations could in this case be harnessed for a positive effect both in terms of achieving the engagement sort and the display of how such experiences can be delivered with effective management.

Overall, the strategy recognises that the current situation will not readily assist in achieving the Department’s future goals and as such certain careful yet sympathetic changes need to be made going forward. This is commendable. To allow Bike use – something readily available to the vast majority of visitors, be they local, interstate or international – to be a major focus point of such change, would not only be hugely appreciated by many on a day to day basis, but would also put the Department at the forefront of park management policy within the nation. However, it will ultimately be the implementation of the strategy in a timely manner with respect to the feedback both from this release and previously with regard to Mountain Bike access opportunities which will be the key to it being successful.