Right to roam and/or purpose build mountain bike trails? Best of both worlds or conflicting interest? Heiko Mittelstädt / DIMB
Trail Network in Germany Historic trail network is very dense: Gravelled forest/fire roads Natural surface tracks Single trails (partly build by hikers associations)
Right to roam in Germany Right to roam for recreation in nature: for anyone, anywhere, anytime, for free No matter if public or private land Cycling in Germany is allowed on streets and paths The counties can regulate the details and restrict this law
Different County Regulations Forest or open range Cycling on fire roads are always allowed Cycling on single trails: in some counties allowed in some counties it s not clearly defined in some counties it s restricted Special regulations in conservation areas, national parks etc.
DIMB Open Trails Lobbying for trail access Our instruments: Communication Round table Hearings Statements PR Lawsuit
Sharing the Trail We are not dangerous We don t cause erosion (not more or less than hikers) We don t disturb wildlife
Disciplines?
What Kind of Trails?
Trail Features?
Purpose Build Tracks Build elements Jumps Higher Speed
Illegal Tracks Breach of property Liability for landowner Nature protection Bad image for all bikers
DIMB Legalize Freeride Manual how to authorize and build tracks Support local clubs to build flow trails as an example for others Tracks in the forest are on free accessible land Official authorization is similar to hiking path Only a few are designated sport areas with different legislation
Advantages of Flowtrails Tracks for beginners and advanced riders Canalization for freeriders Canalization for build activities Bike club is a local lobby Making MTB visible
User Regulation Politicians like to separate user groups to minimize alleged conflicts Tourism is in favor of separate, purpose build tracks (easier to market and benefit from than public trail networks) Trail building company's are interested in purpose build tracks, too
Conflict If we ask for purpose build tracks, will we end up in bike ghettos?
Purpose Build Tracks If Bikers want purpose build tracks exclusively for themselves, why should hikers share their trails? And do all Bikers actually need and want separate trails? Different bike disciplines have different needs Use differentiating terms like Touring MTB / Freeride For most bikers purpose build trails are only an additional offer Thus purpose build tracks should not be promoted as tracks that all mountain bikers will use and therefore steer clear of shared tracks.
Seasonal Opening Why do bikers try to protect their tracks from erosion? Where should we ride in winter? Tracks should be open all year Nature protection/wildlife isn t an argument (same effect of bikers and hikers)
Security Can we restrict access rights for hikers for security reasons? Are we dangerous? Bikers have to care for hikers even on designated bike tracks. Don t signpost hikers forbidden as we don t want to be forbidden elsewhere. If there is a need for separation try to keep pedestrians of purpose build trails by design: Bikers like long flat slopes Pedestrian like short distances And: reduce the speed of the track (for the sake of security and trail sustainability)
Entrance Fee or Membership? If Bikers ask for an entrance fee to their purpose build tracks, why should hikers or landowners not ask for money? Purpose build tracks have to be open for public access for free Money should be founded by public hand, tourism, sponsors, club members, parking fees, donations, special offers (transportation, guiding, lessons, bike rental, bike shop)
Conclusion 20% of bikers prefer purpose build tracks 80% of bikers prefer to ride in nature Purpose build tracks should be: Only an additional offer to a free trail network Opened all season Not restricted for hikers Ridden safely and on sight Free of charge