"Mountain bike vs hiker: The other war in the woods"
"Sabotage is rare, but there's lots of room for conflict in the B.C. backwoods"

By Jason Proctor, CBC News Posted: Jan 08, 2015 6:09 AM PT Last Updated: Jan 08, 2015 8:52 AM PT

I prefer a good dirtbike

This article was a simple attempt by a ne'er do well writer from the CBC to incite conflict and hatred between the groups for the sake of a story. Truth is, there's very little vitriol between them, possibly because almost all mountain bikers are hikers too.

The whole issue here revolves around one sick and misguided individual who was trying to hurt or maim bikers by vandalizing a bikes only trail. She needs psychiatric help. What happens if someone flies over the bars and ends up paralyzed?

I see little value in discussing the article

Enjoyed the trails on Seymour on Saturday, probably met 50 hikers/trail runners/dog walkers, and many mountain bikers, 100% positive interactions across all users. There is no war in the woods except in the mind of hardcore anti-mountain bikers.

Shore riders have never learned or adopted the Leave No Trace ethos. Destroy first, ask questions later. Why ask for permission?

Their progeny desecrate the environment with their illegal and destructive trails with no thought for the wildlife habitat and the lasting scars they leave.

It's selfish and self-interested for the sake of creating adrenaline sports careers, and marketing and merchandising commercial interests. The whole "Shore" brand of bikes, merchandise, media (DVDs, magazines, and websites) were all fruits of the illicit and illegal exploitation and destruction of the environment.

The precedent has been set, and inspires countless other irresponsible enthusiasts elsewhere to exploit and ravage their environs as Shore riders have done.

Let's not mention the network of hiking trails throughout the province that aren't sanctioned, most of which outdoor enthusiasts blaze themselves. Even the ones that are sanctioned can be considered "lasting scars."

and frankly, most 'hiking only' trails I've been on in the past few years are in way worse condition than bike primary/multi-use trails.

You have overstated the situation on the North Shore, but not by much.
There are several illegal trails I know of, and likely more that I don't know of. See here for more.

On the other hand there are many bikers who do good trail work that benefits hikers and bikers. Such as on the old Boulder Creek Trail, that has been improved a lot, but not to the point of tearing up the earth much, or adding rocks, just minor things to make clear the trail. And the odd bridge here and there. Like the one below over the (dry at this time) south tributary of Boulder Creek just before it empties into Boulder Creek itself. Even though this bridge it not needed by hikers.
Is this particular trail really illegal? Since there has been a trail along the south side of Boulder Creek for many years, maybe decades or longer, is doing mainly minor improvements a bad thing? It doesn't appear on any nsmba or trailforks map I know of. For sure not on the official LSCR map.

But there's plenty of other so-called secret trails not on maps that have more bike structures on them, like Lola. And on the southwest continuation of the "Blowdown Route" trail from the Seymour works yard there's some huge unfinished structures. Yes, LSCR staff have done some removal of structures, but there's more they could do.

Attached Thumbnails

 

Many of the North Shore trails were there long before mountain bikers and were actually logging roads built in the early part of the 20th century. The biking community has improved these and in some cases built connectors. I was hiking on these 30 years ago and rarely saw another person.

From my perspective, this whole story is a load of sensationalist crap. Almost everyone that I know that participates in ANY outdoor pursuit includes both hiking and biking. These labels are not accurate. There may be a conflict between mountain bikers and non-mountain bikers on occasion, and there are certainly bad eggs everywhere, but by no means am I aware of any systematic dichotomy between hikers and bikers.

And for those griping about trail building, your arguments could easily apply to urban development, oil & gas, highway building, logging, mining, ski hills, or even farming. Every back yard was once a patch of undisturbed wilderness too. I'm not endorsing wanton forest destruction, but it would be hypocritical to wag a finger at mountain bike trail builders from the Grouse Grind, or vice versa. I have many a logging road to thank for my outdoor opportunities. The argument of legal vs. illegal is, for the most part, semantic, if you're talking about crown land. The North shore is a perfect place to build trails, as it's proximity to the city ensures a relatively low value for larger and more sensitive wildlife, given the level of human traffic. Better to build there than develop a pristine and balanced ecosystem elsewhere.

Responsible and accountable development is the key, and to answer tzoflier, we have seen the pendulum swing back in that direction in many locations, including the North Shore, Squamish and Whistler, regardless of how it may have started (and many things we now respect have come from less-than-auspicious beginnings.). The large bike community is stepping up to sustain their network responsibly, for the most part. I think you'd be surprised with who that group referred to as "Shore riders" actually is made up of. Quite a few members of the community, if I'm not mistaken.

In the end, much of the anti-mountain biker rhetoric generated by this story tends to be of the NIMBY variety, which is a shame.

"Sabotage is rare, but there's lots of room for conflict in the B.C. backwoods" Really? Is that because there's lots of room for anything in the BC backwoods, including hikers and bikers?

Yes, what you say is correct. Even now I can spend a day above the powerline on lower Seymour and never see anyone there. Like this weekend. Every trail had no one on it as far as I could see, except for one biker going down Neds. And go further north towards Boulder Creek and you'll have the place to yourself all day.

Although the biking community has improved some trails, as you say, and as I have too, there are plenty of structures they have built that are unapproved by LSCR, some very large ones that are incomplete. And they don't usually bother to completely remove the ones that have been discarded, leaving them beside the new trail.

CBC news story, February 4, 2015

Mountain bike traps on Vancouver's North Shore highlight tension on the trails:
Mountain biker Mark Wood says recent incidents an anomaly, but hiker says multi-use trails are dangerous

Again, heaps of unauthorized hiking trails throughout this province.

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish on an online forum, but it seems like you're trying to stoke tensions. Take a chill pill. Try the sport for yourself. If you don't like the crowds (including hikers/bikers), head for quieter areas I guess?

Whenever I see "news" stories like this, I think of line from a BCIT media relations course description.

"The media is a business like any other. Their product is controversy. "