In case someone cites this guy
as some kind of "researcher", as happened to me, you should know that
he is exclusively a mountain biker and mountain biking advocate. His position
on the IMBA Board of Directors and his being a representative for Kona Bikes say
it all. He is not a "researcher"! He is just a person who read the
same "studies" that I reviewed and debunked in my paper http:/ /mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm.
He has never done a lick of scientific research, and obviously has no
understanding of science or research.
Mike
http://www.americantrails.org/resources/ManageMaintain/WKeenImpacts.html:
Comparing relative impacts of various trail user groups
A summary of research and studies on factors that affect trails
management strategy and determining uses for each trail.
By Woody Keen
www.traildynamics.com
I am a professional trail builder based in NC and as such I see the relative
impacts of all user groups on a very regular basis. I recently researched and
made comments on this issue for a local state forest recreational plan and you
may use these comments and review of the research in your efforts there. You
will find my comments below comparing the relative impacts of horses vs. bikes,
I hope this is helpful. Please let me know if I can answer any other questions
for you.
Erosion on a hiking-only trail, the Tennessee Creek Trail in Marin County, CA
Comparing relative impacts of various trail user groups: The EA document
introduces the concept that different user groups have varying levels of
physical impacts on trails noting that hiking and biking have similar impacts
while horse use has significantly higher impacts. Unfortunately the document
does not really site any specific research or studies in forming this
conclusion and some reviewers of the EA may read in an opinion based on
prejudice instead of reaction to hard science. As a professional trail
designer/builder, perhaps I have researched this (as it is important to my job)
more than the author of the EA and I can share the research I have re-viewed.
The statements/claims in the EA are certainly well founded and number of
different studies back up the generalizations made.
A 2001 study performed by botanist Richard Reader of the University of Guelph
(Canada) noted that "We've found that hikers have the same effect as
bikers do, regardless of the number of trips along the path. In reality, both
are equally damaging to the environment, but there is increased trail wear
because twice the number of people are now using the trails." (Impacts
of Experimentally Applied Mountain Biking and Hiking on Vegetation and Soil of
a Deciduous Forest - Eden Thurston and Richard Reader).
A trail impact study from the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute
comparing hiking impacts to horses and llamas noted: "Horse traffic
resulted in statistically significant higher sediment yields (the primary
indicator of trail deterioration) than either hiker or llama traffic. The low
level (250 passes) horse treatment caused more impact than the high level (1000
passes) llama treatments, suggesting that horses can cause at least four times
as much impact to trails under the conditions simulated in this experiment. In
addition, under dry trail conditions horse traffic caused significant
reductions in soil bulk density (a measure of how compacted the soil is)
compared to llama and hiker traffic. Horse traffic also caused significant
increases in soil roughness compared with the other 2 users. This suggests that
the greater impacts of horses on trails is a result of soil loosening of trail
surfaces that are otherwise compacted, thereby increasing the detachability of
soil particles and increasing sediment yield and erosion." (Llamas,
Horses, and Hikers: Do They Cause Different Amounts of Impact? - Thomas
Deluca (University of Montana) and David Cole (USFS - Wilderness Research
Institute) 1998 study)
Don Weir also addresses the differences in compaction of soils by some users
and displacement of soils by others in his book A Guide to the Impacts of
Non-Motorized Trail Use (Don Weir and Associates- Edmonton Alberta Canada).
Weir noted: "Repeated passes by bicycles (and most other users) tend to
compact the soils of a trail tread. Vertical compaction tends to push particles
closer together, thereby increasing shear strength. An increase in shear
strength of the soil will have greater ability to resist erosive forces."
Weir also notes that: "Research to date has indicated that the degree of
impacts from mountain bikes, relative to those of walkers who have their own
unique forms of impacts, appear to be similar."
The Weir book is a wonderful resource and a great review of the literature and
research available on the subject of trail impacts. It cites from many studies
from around the word on the subject matter (many of these studies I have
complete copies of the research papers). A few of these notable sources
include:
Cessford (1995) asserts that: "Mountain bikers will exert a downward force
through their tyres (translated to tires - Cessford is from New Zealand)which
comprises the wheel load divided by the contact area, is likely to be less than
that of heavier motorized vehicles, horses, and heavily laden hikers." (Off
Road Impacts of Mountain Bikes: A Review and Discussion, Science and Research
- G.R. Cessford, Department of Conservation Wellington New Zealand).
Weaver and Dale (1978) found that: "During down slope travel, downhill
stepping (by foot and horse) was more erosive than downhill motor biking."
It should be noted that the modern mountain bike did not exist at the time of
this study, but later studies show that mountain bikes have far less impacts
(equal to hiking) as compared with motor bikes. (Trampling Effects of
Hikers, Motorcycles, and Horses in Meadows and Forests) - T. Weaver and D.
Dale - Journal of Applied Ecology 1978)
In the Executive Summary of Weir's book, he notes that: "Common belief
holds that wheeled vehicles cause new trails to form more readily than the
actions of feet or hooves, thus justifying the allowance of off trail travel by
hikers and equestrians. Yet, erosion studies cited above, practically Weaver and
Dale (1978, Quinn et al (1981), Soanne et al (1981) and Cole (1987) , suggest
that in many places, "feet and hooves will trample more than bicycle
tires. The instantaneous sheer forces exerted on a plant by a foot or hoof will
have much more of a tearing effect than the rolling over and crushing force of
a bicycle wheel."
Don Weir also explores the effects/impacts of what he refers to as biological
loading" in his book. He notes: "The amount of excreta produced by
user groups is a function of user type and the residence time the user is in
the area. We can hypothesize that equestrians produce the most amount by mass;
then hikers, who have a longer residence time; and finally the mountain bikers
who have the shortest residence time and therefore are less likely to need to
void".
Perhaps the most widely accepted research on trail impacts of different users
is the Seney/Wilson Study as it compared all the user groups together in one
study (hikers, motorcycles, mountain bikes, and horses). Some of the findings
from the Seney/Wilson Study include:
"The sediment yields reported in part B of Table 4 indicates that horse
plots produced significantly more sediment yield than the bicycle, control, or
hiker plots." "Hiker and bicycle plots were not significantly
different from each other or the control plots." " Indeed, hikers
produced the second largest increase in sediment yield following the horse
treatments, and overall the horse and hiker plots suggest that hooves and feet
make more sediment available for removal than wheels on pre-wetted soils. The
results in Part D of Table 4 indicate horse traffic produced significantly more
sediment than other users on dry plots as well". (Erosional Impact of
Hikers, Horses, Motorcycles, and Off Road Bicycles on Mountain Trails in Montana-
John Wilson and Joseph Seney - Mountain Research and Development 1994)
There are numerous other research reports that compare relative impacts of
different user types on soils, vegetation, and trail tread surfaces. Most of
the readers of my comments are likely to be bored by now as few are as
interested in this subject matter as I am. I will therefore to cease to cite
from these various reports and move on. Suffice it to say however that Dr. Gary
Blank was well founded in his assertion that horses do indeed have a greater
impact on trails than do hikers or mountain bikes.
Observations in the field by a trained eye will report similar results to the
hard science and note that horse damage to trails is easier to record. This
also follows common sense logic; horses will have greater impacts due to a much
higher combined weight (horse with rider) concentrated into a smaller surface
area (four hooves of which not all four can be on the ground as the horse moves
forward, as compared to a bicycle tire which has a large contact surface area),
and horse are the only trail user with metal (most trail horses are shoed) to
trail tread contact (tires of mountain bikes and shoes on hikers are rubber).
Despite numerous reports (coming from science and research), observations and
common sense that horses do indeed have much higher impacts than the other two
user groups (hikers and mtn bikes), I am in no way suggesting that horses be
removed from the DuPont State Forest trail system. To the contrary, I see DSF
as being a wonderful and important resource for equestrian trail users. We do
however need to recognize the greater impacts and make good decisions about
which trails are appropriate for horse use and which ones are not. Trails
identified as not suitable for horses (so as to protect the trail resources)
always have the option of re-location to better alignments for sustainability
and these options should be exercised in DSF when at all possible.
There are, however, a number of limiting factors on how quickly these changes
can be made: availability of funding resources for professional trail
construction, volunteer efforts on behalf of the equestrian community,
cooperation with other users on volunteer projects to improve trail conditions
for all users to name a few. Perhaps a long-term goal for the trail system at
DSF could be to maximize the trail mileage for each user group (to provide for
abundant recreational opportunities and have a very positive effect on the
local economy) while minimizing impacts to the natural resources through good
management decisions and sustainable trail development practices.
I believe that in addition to relative impacts, there are a number of factors
that should be taken into consideration in the trails management strategy and
determining trail uses for each trail in DSF. Certainly the relative impacts of
user types needs to be considered and impacts monitored to make resource
protection decisions. Other factors include:
1. Need and demand for trail resources. The EA pointed out that the
Southern Appalachian Assessment of 1996 concluded that recreational
opportunities in natural appearing and remote settings were abundant with
exceptions for mountain biking and horseback riding (and other uses not allowed
in DSF). This report seems to indicate that hiking opportunities were ample and
not limited in any way. Taking this into consideration, perhaps an emphasis
needs to be placed on developing sustainable recreational opportunities for
those trail activities being generally under served (horseback riding and
mountain biking).
2. Contributions of the various user groups giving back to the trail system
(sweat equity). Equestrians and mountain bikers have led the charge of
volunteer projects much more so than hikers. In fact, hiking groups are not
working in the forest as a user group except working with and under the
supervision of mountain bike leaders. The typical public FODF workday profile
is: Blue Ridge Bike Club members providing the leadership and knowledge as well
as club owned tools, 75- 90% workers from the mountain bike community and a
small fraction coming from the hiking community. The equestrian community holds
its own separate workdays with the leadership coming from the Pisgah
Trailblazers and this group has been fairly consistent in holding work weekends
from the forest inception to present.
The focus of projects by different groups has been quite different. The hiking
community has no projects located in DSF they can call their own, and have only
contributed some (but limited help) to the mountain bike community based
projects. Projects performed under the leadership of the mountain bike
community have focused on the following trail tread improvements: providing for
better drainage for trails to control water issues (adding grade dips and
knicks to poorly designed trails, all over the forest on many trails), armoring
steep sections of trail to protect the native soils from erosion (Longside
Trail, Cedar Rock Trail, Burnt Mountain, bottom of Jim Branch Trail), designing
and building sustainable new trails and re-locations for poorly designed trails
(Galax Trail, Reasonover Creek trail re-route during the IMBA Epic, Hickory
Mountain Trail re-route at the old rifle range, the new addition to the
Airstrip Trail, Pine Tree Extension from Staton Road to Sheep Mountain, the
Switchback Trail), construction of needed trail structures (switchbacks like
those found on the Galax trail) and providing for educational opportunities for
all trail users though public trail schools.
Imaging what DuPont's trail system would look like without these significant
contributions and improvements from the mountain bike community is daunting and
needless to say there would have been a much larger impact on the resources
(soil loss due to erosion) without these projects. The equestrian projects in
the forest seem to focus on quite different projects: corridor clearing
(brushing back of trails), work around the barn area (weed eating and cutting
grass, fence work on the paddocks, fireplace ring and wood storage), signing
and marking trails in the earlier stages of development, providing horse tie
outs at key attractions to protect the trees, and some (but limited) drainage
work on bad mud hole areas such as Turkey Knob trail. No doubt these have been
important contributions to the forest and projects that forest staff would have
likely not been able to accomplish without the help. However, due to the cited
greater impacts to trail tread surface caused by horse use there should be a
suggested shift and more energy could be directed at mitigating impacts by
contributing more to trail tread related projects (perhaps working with the
mountain bike community who are educated and experienced in this type of work).
3. Numbers of users within the various user groups and predicted future use
patterns as compared with needed trail mileage for average length of stay.
A number of sources have indicated that DSF averages 3000-5000 visitors per
week. The EA document (and Trails Master Plan) breaks down the visitation into
the most common forms of recreation: hiking (57%), mountain biking (25%),
horseback riding (7%) and trail running (5%). National statistics find that
there are the following numbers of trail users in America: 73.3 million hikers,
43.1 million single track mountain bikers, and 4.3 million horse back riders
(sources: Outdoor
Industry Association 2003 Participation Study and the American Horseman's
Council).
All of these could certainly be broken down into sub categories, but perhaps
the most important split would be looking at causal walkers (the typical
waterfall tourist) differently from serious hikers. Hikers and walkers need the
least amount of trail to make an outing experience due to the slower pace of
travel and average time spent in the forest. Trail runners can range from those
just catching a one-hour workout traveling an average of 4-6 miles to long
distance backcountry runners who travel distances and speeds more similar to
mountain bikers. The Trails Master Plan Survey found that mountain bikers and
equestrians had the longest average stay as compared with other users and also
traveled more trail distance per visit. All of this information can be used in the
planning process and trails management to make sure each user group has ample
trail mileage to accommodate desired experiences.
Woody Keen
Cedar Mountain, NC
ascentdesc@citcom.net
Woody Keen, Cedar Mountain, North Carolina. Woody has been a leading
mountain bike advocate for more than a decade. Keen and his wife JoJo were
instrumental in creating the top-notch mountain bike trail system in the Dupont
(North Carolina) State Forest, where he continues to serve as the volunteer
trails coordinator. Keen is co-owner of a full-service trailbuilding company,
Trail Dynamics. He has a special interest in creating sustainable freeriding
opportunities.
http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/site/voice_stories/slickrock_waterfalls_great_trails_dupont_has_it_all/issue/541
Local mountain bike advocate Woody Keen, who also serves on the board for
FODF, echoes her sentiments. Everyone had to roll up their sleeves to get this
done. Its not too often you can beat big money development.
http://www.blueridgebicycleclub.org/topten.html:
by Woody Keen
Greetings fellow bicyclists,
Recently there has been much discussion about a whether the list server should be open or
closed to nonmembers. As you know, the officers
voted to keep this service open to all. We would, however, like to take a
moment to remind you of what the club has accomplished, and why you should
support our efforts through your membership. I am only a mountain biker, so I
can only focus on that. Perhaps someone else can contribute what we have done
in the road bike area.
As a mountain biker, you really would not have anywhere to ride your bike
without the efforts of the BRBC. This is not just a clich鬠but in fact
quite true. All the local mountain bike trails are open to you because of the
efforts of the club and its members. Let's take a closer look. Here are the top
ten reasons to join the BRBC if you are a mountain biker.
There you have it: ten concrete
reasons why you should be a member of the BRBC. It is easy and fun to be a
member. The application
form is online at the BRBC website.
Even if you are not a "club person", you can support our efforts with
your $25 membership and do nothing else. If you are reading this and own a
mountain bike, you are indeed benefiting from the ongoing efforts of the club.
We need your support to accomplish even more great projects in the upcoming
year. Whether you ride a $300 or $3000 bike, membership in the BRBC is a cheap
investment to keep you rolling out in the dirt.
Woody Keen
Home
| Top | Mail
Blue Ridge Bicycle Club Inc. 2004
http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=23323:
Greetings all,
Sorry for such a delayed response to Jeremy's question, I have been busy and
have not had a chance to find out the answer. I finally spoke to District
Ranger Randy Burgess last night and we chated for quite some time including
discusion on Farlow Gap trail. I had noticed that it did not show up on the
quaterly review for proposed projects and was afraid the decision had been
made.
I was plesantly surprised to learn the Randy had pulled it from the
proposals list and that means that Farlow Gap will remain open to bikes.
This issue started when a hiker was aparently run off the trail by a mtn
biker and filed an official compaint with the USFS. Rnady told me that he
and his family had also had one bad encounter with riders going to fast on
another trail in Pisgah when they were out hiking one day. He did tell me
that all other encounters with bikers were positive and he noted that if
hikers are looking to get away from mtn bikes that there were plenty of
hiking only trails providing that experience.
Randy is a really good guy and rides a mtn bike a little bit. We have a
meeting set up for next week at Bent Creek and he noted he may bring his
bike if we promised not to laugh at him.
Way too many of you reading this contribute very little to the local mtn
bike advocacy efforts. I will ask of three things of you moving forward:
1. Every reaction you have with other trail users(horses and hikers) is an
opportunity to make an impression, make it a positive one by slowing down,
yielding the trail if needed and talking with other trail users. Ask them
how thier hike is, talk about the good weather, warn them of any hazards
ahead and tell them to have a nice day. This simple action will continue to
help secure our riding priviliages for years to come.
2. Come out and do some trailwork once in a while. The last 2 years have
really taking a toll on local trails with lots of rain and increased trail
use. As a mtn bike community, we need to make sure we are giving back to the
trail systems that we enjoy so much.
3.Join BRBC. Our local club needs your support and we are always working
hard to improve riding conditions (both mtn and road) for locals and
visitors alike. We can't do it without your support. Ask at your local bike
shop how you can join the club and get involved.
Woody Keen- BRBC Trails Resource Director
http://www.konaeurope.com/advocacy/profiles/profiles.htm:
Woody Keen - Southeast Kona Rep
Woody is based in North Carolina and has worked for Kona since 1995. He is a an
active member of the Blue Ridge Bike Club, IMBA, the Sierra Club, Southern Utah
Wilderness Alliance, The Conservation Network, Carolina Mountain Land
Conservancy, The Access Fund, Foothills Trail Conference, and the Friends of
Dupont Forest.
Woody and his local club hosted a very successful IMBA Trail School In March
2001, with over 70 attendees, and were chosen to host an IMBA EPIC Ride in
October 2001. In the Spring of 2000, Woody helped formed Friends of the Falls,
a grassroots group fighting a gated housing development located within a state
forest. The area has incredible trails highlighted by spectacular waterfalls,
some of which were featured in the Last of the Mohicans feature film. After a 6
month struggle and campaign the state acquired the land in question through
eminent domain and it is now a playground for all outdoor enthusiasts instead
of houses and country clubs.
Woody is a powerful advocate for mountain biker's rights. He says: "If you
think advocacy work doesn't pay off, think again. I would be happy to take you
for a ride in the Falls area and prove you wrong. I am thrilled to see smiles
of faces of everyone who comes here. It is truly a Mecca for mountain biking
and other trail users.
"We have to give back to the trails we use. I enjoy teachingpeople how to
build and maintain sustainable trails. I do volunteer work with Boy/Girl
Scouts, local summer camps, college and universities, and the Blue Ridge Bike
Club/Friends of Dupont Forest. Everyone enjoys getting dirty, they just need to
learn how to do it in a productive way. I also do a fair bit of work by myself,
I probably have 500 hours in since the first of the year. There is nothing
better than riding a section of trail that you built. While others just breeze
by unknowingly; you study the drainages, crib walls, sweeping turns, swithbacks
and marvel and the beauty of full bench cuts."
"I was first attracted to Kona due to their advocacy efforts, the Buck a
Bike program was very cool. I could only work for a company who gives back as
much as Kona does. I used to own a rock climbing equipment supplier and when I
sold that I got into the bike industry to have fun. Kona is all about having
fun. And of course Kona bikes are numero uno."