You are here

International Mountain Bicycling Association Wants Access To National Scenic Trails

Share

The International Mountain Bicycling Association is running a campaign to gain access to National Scenic Trails, such as the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail, and is being opposed by the American Hiking Society and watched by other groups.

While IMBA touts the campaign as a way to allow mountain bikers to "continue to enjoy our nation's best trails and open bike access on more," the American Hiking Society counters by stating that it "believes that trails that allow hikers to explore the outdoors without competing with bicyclists are in some instances entirely appropriate."

Across the country there are a number of national scenic trails -- the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail, the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, the Ice Age National Scenic Trail, and the Natchez Trace National Scenic Trail, just to name a few. While many of the trails are managed by the National Park Service, others are managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. As might be expected, these different entities have different regulations when it comes to mountain bikes on national scenic trails.

The Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, which is managed by the Forest Service, permits mountain bike use "along those segments that are outside of designated and recommended wilderness areas, and have been approved by the federal land managers. However, these activities may only occur as long as they do not 'substantially interfere' with the nature and purposes for which the trail was created- namely foot and stock use."

The Park Service, meanwhile, prohibits mountain bikes on the Appalachian Trail. Bikes also are prohibited on the Pacific Crest Trail, which is managed by the Forest Service.

IMBA Communications Director Mark Eller did not respond to a Traveler inquiry as to which national scenic trails his group wants access to. However, in a blog post on IMBA's site in August he wrote that there obviously are some trails too rugged for bikers.

"The Appalachian Trail is specifically designated as a foot-travel route, and as someone who spent many years leading backpacking trips on the AT in Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania I can tell you that it ... would not make an appealing venue for mountain biking. Other trails traverse wilderness parcels where biking isn't an option," he wrote.

"IMBA is not being absolutist in our approach. We are more than willing to discuss how to advance more opportunities for long-distance trails, and where bikes will, and will not, be a welcome addition," he added. "It's a discussion we hope to have with many groups, and land managers, in upcoming weeks. Ideally, we could all talk while enjoying a nice hike, or bike ride, together."

IMBA's efforts to expand biking access onto national scenic trails is being watched by a number of groups, including the Appalachian Trail Conservancy.

"The National Scenic Trails community, as well as the American Hiking Society, is aware of IMBA's push for biking access on some portions of National Scenic Trails. ATC has seen recent rhetoric and we are working collectively with the Partnership for the National Scenic Trails and the AHS to address concerns with IMBA's initiative," Laura Belleville, director of conservation for the Conservancy, said in an email.

"The A.T. is designated 'footpath only' by Congress, and we have not had any specific proposals for bike access on the A.T. Thus far we have not made any organizational statements about IMBA's 'campaign,' but we fully support PNTS and AHS," she added. "We are carefully watching the campaign and will offer a statement at the appropriate time if necessary."

Comments

If the Smokies allows horses on the fragile trail system then parity for mtn bikes is only logical. But Smokies management defies logic and there is no organized mtn bike coaltion that carries sufficient economic sway to garner attention from Dale Ditmanson like the equine lobby. (refer to the horse concession smack dab in the middle of cades cove)

However, I think neither of them belong in the Smokies anyway. And I mountain bike.


I think it's harmless.

If everyone did what they thought was "harmless" despite the rules, the country would be in caos. And, if you think lawless behaviour doesn't influence peoples opinions, I believe you are mistaken.

For mjvande - your position is so extreme its laughable. "To lazy to walk" ????? Have you ever riden a mountain bike? I can assure you it is far more difficult than walking. No inanimate objects should be allowed on the trails? So no hiking poles, no GPS, no water filters? I guess we all have to hike naked.

Yes, bikes have somewhat greater impact on trails than do hikers, but not dramatically more and certainly not as much as the "animate" horses. Further, the biking organizations are strong contributors to trail construction and maintenance. I hike mixed use trail frequently. I have never seen "killed small animals" or detrimental plant damage. "Rough treatment of nature" LOL. I can assure you nature is much rougher on the bikers than they are on nature.


My personal view is that biking should be restored to Wilderness like it used to be. The ban on bicycling defies logic and common sense. If groups of 20 horses are okay to trample and crap on trails in Wilderness, I really don't see why cycling should not be allowed. That being said, it's beyond the point at hand.

As for Mr. Vandeman, here is his background: http://www.outsideonline.com/blog/outdoor-adventure/the-trial-of-mike-vandeman-1.html The best course of action is to ignore him.

Per the urban dictionary:

HOHA: Hateful Old Hikers Association


In addition to Zebulons assertion that Wilderness areas be open to bikes it is reasonable to consider that added support from the cycling community for the wilderness designation would be benificial in having additional areas protected from development.

With regards to MJvande, he is Mike Vandeman. Convicted of battery with a handsaw against two bikers. He has posted the same quote in every single mountain bike related story he can find on the internet. He gleefully posts news stories and incidents of mountain bikers getting injured on newslists and has advocated violence against cyclists. He has harrassed online users and even gone so far as to contact peoples ISP's.


Just finished reading A LOT about this issue of mountain bikes wanting more access. I cannot deduce why people are so very adament and upset at the idea of encountering nature loving and responsible outdoor enthusiasts whose mode of travel differs slightly from their own.

It is emabarrassing for me to read many of the posts that contain nothing but flat out lies, vitriol and ignorance coming from "adults" in the hiking community.

Hikers have unfettered access, most of which excludes other trail users, to ALL of the public trails in the United States. I am baffled by the stance that groups such as the American Hiking Society, the PCTA, the NCTA and the hate group PCT-L take in relation to seeing a bike evey so often. It truly is shameful behavior.

- Sarah W

Hiker - not mountain biker (I am too old)


In the spirit of "sharing", wouldn't it be good to also open up all bike trails to motorcycles and atvs?

Sarah - Your statement that hikers have access to "ALL" public trails is not accurate. See Big South Fork NRA for examples.

Imtnbke - thanks for conjuring up apartheid and Jim Crow laws in respect to your plight as a mountain biker. I never realized just how much your rights to a reasonable life have been stepped on. Enlightening. I also enjoyed your excuse regarding the "risk of writing quickly". I hope you don't have the same flippant approach on your trails where there is an inherent "risk of riding quickly".


Hi Kurt -- we've got to stop meeting like this!

As some of you know, I'm IMBA's communications director. Kurt and I have had several lengthy discussions in recent years, on these comment pages, and in a few phone conversations.

To answer Kurt's question about IMBA's interest in National Scenic Trails, we believe that there are more opportunities for shared-use segments that could include biking than are currently being offered.

Here are some caveats and observations that go along with that position:

- Wilderness areas can not host bicycling, so portions of the NSTs in Wilderness will not be on IMBA's wish lists for bike access.

- The Appalachian Trail is designated for foot travel only along its entire length.

- Some NSTs, like the Contiental Divide Trail and the North Country Trail, already offer significant opportunities for shared use, including mountain biking. IMBA would like to see even more of these opportunities.

- The complete ban on mountain biking on the Pacific Crest Trail should, in IMBA's view, be reconsidered. We do not envision that mountain biking would be workable on the entire PCT, but there are segments where it could be a welcome addition.

- IMBA beieves that trails can be shared among different user groups, and that separate trails for different users is often too costly and unnecessary -- especially on long-distance trails.

- The scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed journals strongly suggests that mountain biking and hiking have similar impacts on the natural world, and on the trail surface its self.

- Some groups, including the American Hiking Society, have declared that presence of mountain bikers detracts from the hiking experience -- but many hikers who are members of those same organizations have voiced their willingness to share trails with mountain bikers.

- IMBA agrees that not all trails are suitable for shared use among hikers and bikers. Some trails are not well suited to biking and should be managed for hiking only, or shared use amongst hikers and equestrians.

- Some trails should be optimized for bike travel. Currently, there are many more miles of trail in the world where bikes are not allowed than ones where biking is the preferred mode of travel.

- There's not much value in conflating bike access to trails in national parks with the NST issue. IMBA and the NPS have held a partnership agreement for many years, and more than 40 national parks already allow mountain biking on dirt roads and trails.

Phew! Sorry for the long list -- I hope that helps clarify IMBA's position. Of course, not all mountain bikers hew exactly to IMBA's views. Zebulon ... take it away!


Scott Merritt, IMBA's view -- one that is shared by our partner organizations in the Outdoor Alliance (outdooralliance.net), and by most land managing agencies -- is that human-powered recreation has significantly different impacts than motorized recreation. That's not to say that IMBA is against motorized recreation, but we do think that in most cases the management strategies should be different.


The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.