Blogging is a journey of discovery. About three weeks ago I had only the sketchiest knowledge of the mountain biking scene. Now I know some more. Following the concerted assault on this blog by packs of ill mannered and fixated MTBers I’ve begun to educate myself on the subject. It may be early days but so far I’m not that impressed by what I’ve found. (I distinguish between the promotion of cycling in towns and on roads and the promotion of cycling on footpaths in the countryside.)
It’s important to understand the issues. Most questions of policy and controversy are decided with regard to money and jobs and business and profit. Right and wrong, sadly, come well down the field. So if you’re an impartial and independent observer and just want to make your mind up on the basis of the general good you find there are strong and determined voices being raised to point you in the way of sectional and vested interests.
These thoughts arise from the Blacka question of mountain biking. Some of the ways jobs and profit come into this:
a) manufacture of bikes and accessories,
b) distribution and retail of the same,
c) import of the same,
d), advertising products;
e) magazine production and journalism – more advertising.
d) the public and private funded running of courses by appointed officers and others in the outdoor pursuits industry and even in universities.
I’ve probably missed out several elements from this list.
All this adds up to an incentive for many people to promote bikes, to present biking in a positive light and also to show it to be ‘cool’ and exciting, even ‘sexy’ (though I’ve not myself yet seen scantily clad bimbos advertising mountain bikes). This is the norm these days anyway. Anything that’s good for business and jobs and the economy is deemed to be de facto right and good (as an extreme example just ask Tory MP Nigel Evans whose constituency contains a branch of an international arms manufacturer).
Cycling was allowed on bridleways under the terms of the 1968 countryside act at a time when nobody anticipated the coming development and marketing of mountain bikes with their robust engineering and thick tyres. It’s interesting to speculate if it would have happened otherwise. One thing we can be pretty certain of: even that law change would never have gone through if it had been seen that it would lead to biking on ordinary public paths. Now it’s the policy of organisations that speak for mountain bikers to lobby to have the whole network of public footpaths opened up for bikers. That’s no secret, most of them actively campaign for this and have no commitment to the present legal situation. The Single Track magazine is written from this perspective and the CTC (Cycling Touring Club) also encourages its members to get onto Local Access Forums and speak up for their policy. It’s not at the moment legal for bikes to use PRoWs in England and Wales but the growing militancy of MTBers could well lead to a move to allow this. Councils like to think they are ‘bike friendly’ without always making the distinction between encouraging cycling to work instead of driving and the quite different activity of downhill mountain biking through woods and green spaces.
So I was looking for an explanation for the irrational and farcical outbursts from MTBers when they discovered I had criticised some of their number two years ago. The reason is now clear to me. They are promoting the activity and some of them make a profit or career out of doing so. The bike industry and economy needs growth and they can only get this if more youngsters take up the sport. They lobby for public footpaths to be opened up to them and they will only succeed in this if they can so skew the arguments that they can get people to believe what is frankly not credible, i.e. that this would have no impact on the paths themselves nor the experience of walkers. My experience suggests that there are so many feeble minded people in public office that the MTBers may be justified in thinking they can achieve this. So it’s no good keeping mum about it. More people should be alerted to what’s happening.
Blacka Moor is a place where soft peat paths on the upper parts easily get damaged by various pressures (including inappropriately by a herd of cattle). It is located in just the kind of place to make it accessible for those who relish speedy downhill biking. Its essential character as a place noted for beauty wildlife and tranquillity will not survive much longer if it becomes a downhill racing theme park.
It’s important to understand the issues. Most questions of policy and controversy are decided with regard to money and jobs and business and profit. Right and wrong, sadly, come well down the field. So if you’re an impartial and independent observer and just want to make your mind up on the basis of the general good you find there are strong and determined voices being raised to point you in the way of sectional and vested interests.
These thoughts arise from the Blacka question of mountain biking. Some of the ways jobs and profit come into this:
a) manufacture of bikes and accessories,
b) distribution and retail of the same,
c) import of the same,
d), advertising products;
e) magazine production and journalism – more advertising.
d) the public and private funded running of courses by appointed officers and others in the outdoor pursuits industry and even in universities.
I’ve probably missed out several elements from this list.
All this adds up to an incentive for many people to promote bikes, to present biking in a positive light and also to show it to be ‘cool’ and exciting, even ‘sexy’ (though I’ve not myself yet seen scantily clad bimbos advertising mountain bikes). This is the norm these days anyway. Anything that’s good for business and jobs and the economy is deemed to be de facto right and good (as an extreme example just ask Tory MP Nigel Evans whose constituency contains a branch of an international arms manufacturer).
Cycling was allowed on bridleways under the terms of the 1968 countryside act at a time when nobody anticipated the coming development and marketing of mountain bikes with their robust engineering and thick tyres. It’s interesting to speculate if it would have happened otherwise. One thing we can be pretty certain of: even that law change would never have gone through if it had been seen that it would lead to biking on ordinary public paths. Now it’s the policy of organisations that speak for mountain bikers to lobby to have the whole network of public footpaths opened up for bikers. That’s no secret, most of them actively campaign for this and have no commitment to the present legal situation. The Single Track magazine is written from this perspective and the CTC (Cycling Touring Club) also encourages its members to get onto Local Access Forums and speak up for their policy. It’s not at the moment legal for bikes to use PRoWs in England and Wales but the growing militancy of MTBers could well lead to a move to allow this. Councils like to think they are ‘bike friendly’ without always making the distinction between encouraging cycling to work instead of driving and the quite different activity of downhill mountain biking through woods and green spaces.
So I was looking for an explanation for the irrational and farcical outbursts from MTBers when they discovered I had criticised some of their number two years ago. The reason is now clear to me. They are promoting the activity and some of them make a profit or career out of doing so. The bike industry and economy needs growth and they can only get this if more youngsters take up the sport. They lobby for public footpaths to be opened up to them and they will only succeed in this if they can so skew the arguments that they can get people to believe what is frankly not credible, i.e. that this would have no impact on the paths themselves nor the experience of walkers. My experience suggests that there are so many feeble minded people in public office that the MTBers may be justified in thinking they can achieve this. So it’s no good keeping mum about it. More people should be alerted to what’s happening.
Blacka Moor is a place where soft peat paths on the upper parts easily get damaged by various pressures (including inappropriately by a herd of cattle). It is located in just the kind of place to make it accessible for those who relish speedy downhill biking. Its essential character as a place noted for beauty wildlife and tranquillity will not survive much longer if it becomes a downhill racing theme park.