There seems to be some debate on one of the lesser mtb sites about coughing up a few bucks to Mountain Bike Australia for fees. As usual the forum moderator is pushing a personal barrow, which doesn't seem to have depth or logic. Basically he is saying he gets nothing for his money, and that if one does not race, then there is nothing for which one should join. Then don't join mate. It's quite easy, let the clubs organize track building and liason with the appropriate bodies. let clubs organize quality races and recreational rides. Let clubs put together training days with the likes of Cooper, Williamson and Lewis teaching at them. It is the MTBA which is the umberella for all clubs and unites their interests. Indeed all riders whether club members or not get the use of tracks, which for the most part, have been built by and maintained by clubs. Someone has suggested that all the BIG events are run by private promoters. Not quite true really, yes Bright Orange runs some good events and there are a few other good races, but they are really run in conjunction with local clubs, who set the course, do the timing, provide most of the officials and who, once again, build and maintain the tracks in the first place. Sure some private individuals build things, like north shore stuff that gets everyone kicked out of areas, instead of working with clubs and MTBA to get understanding and acceptance. I would have posted this on the other site but I was kicked off for expressing opinions like this which flew in the face of the site's moderator.
mtba fees
- Thread starter jean5614
- Start date
The debate was regarding one persons opinion that they get nothing from MTBA as a recreational licence holder.
They were hoping that MTBA would have more of a trail advocacy slant and is disappointed with what they receive for the recrational licence fees.
I've tried to not put my personal opinion in the above, but in case I have the full debate is here
They were hoping that MTBA would have more of a trail advocacy slant and is disappointed with what they receive for the recrational licence fees.
I've tried to not put my personal opinion in the above, but in case I have the full debate is here
FR Drew
Not a custom title.
I'm willing to stick by my comments on the thread, basically that:
1) The local clubs do almost all the local track building
2) The local clubs do almost all the local advocacy
3) Of the fees paid to local clubs, a substantial wad seem to end up in the pockets of MTBA.
Now sure, some of that covers insurance but what is the rest actually funding? "The MTBA is an umbrella for all clubs and unites their interests"
Great, but IMBA sent Joey Klein out here, not MTBA as far as I'm aware, the Beechworth Chain Gang have built all of their trails, CORC have built all the ones in the ACT, Scratchy has done all the advocacy in SA to get the Mitcham council to open trails and to put pressure on the SA Govt regarding Eagle MTB Park...
Strikes me as a pretty pricey umbrella that is letting a fair bit of rain through.
Of course there may be heaps else going on that we don't hear about but I'm afraid being an umbrella doesn't cover it. (pun unintentional but I'll keep it)
1) The local clubs do almost all the local track building
2) The local clubs do almost all the local advocacy
3) Of the fees paid to local clubs, a substantial wad seem to end up in the pockets of MTBA.
Now sure, some of that covers insurance but what is the rest actually funding? "The MTBA is an umbrella for all clubs and unites their interests"
Great, but IMBA sent Joey Klein out here, not MTBA as far as I'm aware, the Beechworth Chain Gang have built all of their trails, CORC have built all the ones in the ACT, Scratchy has done all the advocacy in SA to get the Mitcham council to open trails and to put pressure on the SA Govt regarding Eagle MTB Park...
Strikes me as a pretty pricey umbrella that is letting a fair bit of rain through.
Of course there may be heaps else going on that we don't hear about but I'm afraid being an umbrella doesn't cover it. (pun unintentional but I'll keep it)
thecat
NSWMTB, Central Tableland MBC
Actually, from what i understand MTBA brough Joey out. They also got Tony, ummm, can't remeber his last name, from http://www.mbwales.com/ out here to adress State forests, Club and NP reps.FR Drew said:
Well you may chose to go back, so that a person is able to defend themselves but this person does not have the right to post on that forum, so I had my rights to defend myself taken from me, as have a number of others who have disagreed on that site, so off you go mr. cat and others and continue your arguement on your exclusive site. This site is an open forum not just open to one persons point of veiw. Getting back to the main and real topic, the MTBA takes a large slab but organizes mountain- biking nationally. While it may seem that the lion's share is doing nothing it does serve to advocate for all riders and give it national recognition. It is somewhat surprising that there is little recognition of the benefits that the club/MTBA approach. There would be very few events of any nature without them.
FR Drew
Not a custom title.
I guess my own personal query is that, if instead of 80 bucks going to MTBA and 10 bucks going to my local club (I believe that's the split for CORC), if 90 bucks went to CORC would cycling here be any worse off.
If all the advocacy is being done locally then what's being gained by the wonderful "national advocate for all riders" thing. If the battles in the ACT and SA for access are being fought pretty much by locals then how is the national advocate for all MTBers helping us? They can exist and say that they're the national body representing MTB but what is the actual product?
Please don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not meaning that the MTBA do nothing, it'd just be nice to have someone clarify what it is they do do. Acting as an advocate for all at a national level sounds very impressive but does it justify them getting 80% of my membership dollars when (to my mind) 90% of the ground level work on trails, advocacy, race organisation and soical rides is being done by the local club?
Personally, I think more of my membership money should be buying sleepers and road base and signage and advertising trails and rides to the local community.
If all the advocacy is being done locally then what's being gained by the wonderful "national advocate for all riders" thing. If the battles in the ACT and SA for access are being fought pretty much by locals then how is the national advocate for all MTBers helping us? They can exist and say that they're the national body representing MTB but what is the actual product?
Please don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not meaning that the MTBA do nothing, it'd just be nice to have someone clarify what it is they do do. Acting as an advocate for all at a national level sounds very impressive but does it justify them getting 80% of my membership dollars when (to my mind) 90% of the ground level work on trails, advocacy, race organisation and soical rides is being done by the local club?
Personally, I think more of my membership money should be buying sleepers and road base and signage and advertising trails and rides to the local community.
Ah mr. chat I see the meaning of slander is foriegn to you, I cannot argue my case on the other site, but the said moderator of that site, to my knowledge, could argue his case here, why would you try to stiffle debate. Was not the idea of the initial posting to guage opinion. Why does it matter on which site it occurs on. I would question anyone that organizes races and then argues against supporting organizations who organize races , for those that race more frequently. I prefer enduro but also ride in xc and crits. I know a lot of people that wouldn't dream of doing an enduro of any length, and others who don't want to race. Sammydoggy you should be able to discuss things here, everyone else can, even me, on this site.
thecat
NSWMTB, Central Tableland MBC
I'm not trying to stifle any debate and have been very vocal on the issue.jean5614 said:
My point is that if you want to argue about the pros and cons of MTBA fees here you are better severed doing that and not bringing up other stuff about one particular individual. At the moment the majority of what's being said here has nothing to do with MTBA.
By having a rant about someone in your iniatial post you changed the whole focus of the issue.
thecat
NSWMTB, Central Tableland MBC
Now to put things back on topic I thought I'd post Tony Scotts reply to the issues raised.
Please find below a reply from Tony Scott sent Friday, 24th March to Gerard.
####
The reason why we allowed recreational memberships to come to MTBA outside the club construct was to encourage those who had no interest in racing per se to join a bigger whole. Like it or not most clubs are still competition focussed - I am certainly aware that some clubs have also taken great steps in enticing non- competitive members to their ranks and I would hope that would continue and be roled out to even more clubs as time goes on.
Gerard is correct to say that I have lamented the fact that recreational memberships of MTBA still only are a very small fraction of our total membership base. This is despite that fact that, apart from insurance, all the remainder of the fee from recreational memberships goes to fund advocacy projects around Australia. Some figures may help.
In 2005 we collected about $15k from (largely) competition based members. Of this about $9k (over and above the generous support from host funding agencies) was spent in the support of the 7 week IMBA visit to 6 states and territories in Australia, a project few would say was without significant benefits, not only to the places who hosted IMBA but also to Australian MTB advocacy in the long term. About $2k was spent attending the Qld Outdoor conference, talking to QPWS on Smithfield and attending the Tony Griffiths (Wales Forestry) talk in Sydney, RNP talks. All these have direct MTB advocacy consequences. Some of the balance was spent on a reprint of the MTBA Code of Conduct cards (BTW - we will be redesigning this shortly). In 2006 we will award $4k to attendees of the 2006 IMBA summit and the Hobart Tracks and Trails conference just for starters!
Perhaps another example will help. If MTBA had the same number of recreational members as we have competition members we would have enough money to employ a full time MTB advocacy officer on real money with enough support to allow him/her to really make very fundamental changes to MTB access in Australia. Heck, with only 1/3 the number we could still fully support a part time officer.
Unfortunately throwing away your renewal card does not achieve much in the long run. From what I understand from your posts on this subject you feel that 'you' personally have not received anything tangible in return for your $42 per year recreational membership of MTBA. You may be correct. But your membership has helped convince CALM in WA to have a more considered approach to MTBing in their areas, your membership has helped restart the discussions at RNP, has helped support IMBA in Australia, and many other MTB advocacy efforts made on your behalf and all other MTB'ers in Australia. I am sorry that you personally have not been a recipient of any benefit but it will happen in due course, but in the meantime thank you for your previous support of all our initiatives for MTB access.
Gerard, Only by being part of the bigger picture will MTB advocacy work to the extent that we would all like. While ever the great mass of Australian MTB'ers stand on the sidelines and refuse to get involved in matters that are vitally important to them things will only change slowly. MTBA recreational membership, either directly to MTBA or through a club, is currently the best way of ensuring continued access for MTB. And while I can understand your claim of not getting anything personally in return for your $42, I do think that while ever we (as a population) only think of 'me' and not 'us' we are doomed to slow progress in MTB access advocacy. Nevertheless it is true I suppose that those members who compete get a personal reward more often - I would be happy to discuss with you efforts we can make to allow this to happen for recreational members as well - noting the financial limits we have available and ensuring that the bottom line of delivery of positive MTB advocacy outcomes and initiatives is not adversely affected.
It is ultimately true to say that MTBA can not do everything. Even your much beloved IMBA still relies greatly on volunteer organisations around the US to deliver local programs but IMBA is the catalyst for those programs to happen. I would like to think that MTBA has been reasonably effective in precipitating change in MTB access over the last 5 years. MTBA has been the catalyst for a change in thinking through our direct intervention in local matters to our continued support of bringing IMBA to Australia. We certainly recognise the importance of the role clubs and club members have in selling the message of MTB access to their local land managers. However it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect MTBA to be intimately involved in each and every local issue - I see our role at the moment, with the resources we have, as being more directed to the peak land managing bodies. The local level legwork still is the domain of those clubs that have the volunteer base and passion to be involved in MTB advocacy matters. But the important thing is that MTBA supports each and every local effort to the best of our ability, time and funds - and yes we have given advice on Glenrock.
Can we do more - most certainly. But more costs money and this either will be by way of corporate support or through MTB riders around Australia getting behind the organisation that supports their passion - MTBA.
I hope this helps your readers understand a little more on what MTBA is doing on their behalf.
Kind Regards (and I will look forward to your membership renewal in due course).
tony
Please find below a reply from Tony Scott sent Friday, 24th March to Gerard.
####
The reason why we allowed recreational memberships to come to MTBA outside the club construct was to encourage those who had no interest in racing per se to join a bigger whole. Like it or not most clubs are still competition focussed - I am certainly aware that some clubs have also taken great steps in enticing non- competitive members to their ranks and I would hope that would continue and be roled out to even more clubs as time goes on.
Gerard is correct to say that I have lamented the fact that recreational memberships of MTBA still only are a very small fraction of our total membership base. This is despite that fact that, apart from insurance, all the remainder of the fee from recreational memberships goes to fund advocacy projects around Australia. Some figures may help.
In 2005 we collected about $15k from (largely) competition based members. Of this about $9k (over and above the generous support from host funding agencies) was spent in the support of the 7 week IMBA visit to 6 states and territories in Australia, a project few would say was without significant benefits, not only to the places who hosted IMBA but also to Australian MTB advocacy in the long term. About $2k was spent attending the Qld Outdoor conference, talking to QPWS on Smithfield and attending the Tony Griffiths (Wales Forestry) talk in Sydney, RNP talks. All these have direct MTB advocacy consequences. Some of the balance was spent on a reprint of the MTBA Code of Conduct cards (BTW - we will be redesigning this shortly). In 2006 we will award $4k to attendees of the 2006 IMBA summit and the Hobart Tracks and Trails conference just for starters!
Perhaps another example will help. If MTBA had the same number of recreational members as we have competition members we would have enough money to employ a full time MTB advocacy officer on real money with enough support to allow him/her to really make very fundamental changes to MTB access in Australia. Heck, with only 1/3 the number we could still fully support a part time officer.
Unfortunately throwing away your renewal card does not achieve much in the long run. From what I understand from your posts on this subject you feel that 'you' personally have not received anything tangible in return for your $42 per year recreational membership of MTBA. You may be correct. But your membership has helped convince CALM in WA to have a more considered approach to MTBing in their areas, your membership has helped restart the discussions at RNP, has helped support IMBA in Australia, and many other MTB advocacy efforts made on your behalf and all other MTB'ers in Australia. I am sorry that you personally have not been a recipient of any benefit but it will happen in due course, but in the meantime thank you for your previous support of all our initiatives for MTB access.
Gerard, Only by being part of the bigger picture will MTB advocacy work to the extent that we would all like. While ever the great mass of Australian MTB'ers stand on the sidelines and refuse to get involved in matters that are vitally important to them things will only change slowly. MTBA recreational membership, either directly to MTBA or through a club, is currently the best way of ensuring continued access for MTB. And while I can understand your claim of not getting anything personally in return for your $42, I do think that while ever we (as a population) only think of 'me' and not 'us' we are doomed to slow progress in MTB access advocacy. Nevertheless it is true I suppose that those members who compete get a personal reward more often - I would be happy to discuss with you efforts we can make to allow this to happen for recreational members as well - noting the financial limits we have available and ensuring that the bottom line of delivery of positive MTB advocacy outcomes and initiatives is not adversely affected.
It is ultimately true to say that MTBA can not do everything. Even your much beloved IMBA still relies greatly on volunteer organisations around the US to deliver local programs but IMBA is the catalyst for those programs to happen. I would like to think that MTBA has been reasonably effective in precipitating change in MTB access over the last 5 years. MTBA has been the catalyst for a change in thinking through our direct intervention in local matters to our continued support of bringing IMBA to Australia. We certainly recognise the importance of the role clubs and club members have in selling the message of MTB access to their local land managers. However it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect MTBA to be intimately involved in each and every local issue - I see our role at the moment, with the resources we have, as being more directed to the peak land managing bodies. The local level legwork still is the domain of those clubs that have the volunteer base and passion to be involved in MTB advocacy matters. But the important thing is that MTBA supports each and every local effort to the best of our ability, time and funds - and yes we have given advice on Glenrock.
Can we do more - most certainly. But more costs money and this either will be by way of corporate support or through MTB riders around Australia getting behind the organisation that supports their passion - MTBA.
I hope this helps your readers understand a little more on what MTBA is doing on their behalf.
Kind Regards (and I will look forward to your membership renewal in due course).
tony
I must admit that I found it interesting to see Glenrock mentioned in tht email. I don't think I had ever said MTBA hadn't given advice on the matter nor had it been a secret that hey has.
Back on topic though and for me, the email demonstates why we need people to join MTBA if only on a social/rec licence. I'd much rther be able to use figures in negotiation of X number of MTBA members rather than a limited club base and large unaffiliated community.
We are trying really hard this year in our club to have a better social element, and maybe all that is needed from MTBA is to send out an email newsletter every month or so to let people know whats going on in the local world of Mtb.
Back on topic though and for me, the email demonstates why we need people to join MTBA if only on a social/rec licence. I'd much rther be able to use figures in negotiation of X number of MTBA members rather than a limited club base and large unaffiliated community.
We are trying really hard this year in our club to have a better social element, and maybe all that is needed from MTBA is to send out an email newsletter every month or so to let people know whats going on in the local world of Mtb.
I think advocacy and racing should be handled by separate organisations - that way you can join the organisation that meets your requirements.
Many people have to join mtba just to get a race licence, and don't think about the advocacy aspect at all.
Others are concerned about advocacy and have no interest in racing.
I imagine a large portion of the racing cost would be insurance.
If you want to race road, mtb & bmx you have to get 3 separate licenses and you are then covered under 3 separate insurance policies, probably with the same insurance company.
Many people have to join mtba just to get a race licence, and don't think about the advocacy aspect at all.
Others are concerned about advocacy and have no interest in racing.
I imagine a large portion of the racing cost would be insurance.
If you want to race road, mtb & bmx you have to get 3 separate licenses and you are then covered under 3 separate insurance policies, probably with the same insurance company.
The motives of individuals who write on sites is of upmost importance on sites. Mr. cat, you should know this. I put my reply on this site because not everyone is able to use the site which contained the initial question. It is funny how tags one used to see on that site disappear and no longer have access to that pathway. Indeed Tony's reply was not posted by him. The reason that this topic does not get discussed on this thread is because others have to defend themselves before they can even get on to the topic. I'm glad I introduced this topic to this site as more people seem to realise where there dollars go and for what reasons they pay them. There are builders and destroyers, join a club and build trails for everyone, not just a few egos.
Not too sure where this post come from- but I will add my two cents worth anyways.
I think a lot of the problem here lies with MTBA not telling us what they are doing. I'm quiet sure they are out there doing a lot of trail advocacy work, organizing events and such but we just don’t hear about it.
I know from experience MTBA are easy to deal with, having personally delt with Tony Scott in regards to an insurance issue, and a friend said a similar thing in regards to a timing mistake at nationals. But they don’t really make it known to us the members and the riders just what they are up to.
Is it worth it? I'd say yes just to have a united cycling body that all clubs operate is worth it. Without it we'd end up like the USA with countless organizations trying to be the rulers of their specific clubs, and events... Being able to run there own rules, with their own agenda and the like.
I think a lot of the problem here lies with MTBA not telling us what they are doing. I'm quiet sure they are out there doing a lot of trail advocacy work, organizing events and such but we just don’t hear about it.
I know from experience MTBA are easy to deal with, having personally delt with Tony Scott in regards to an insurance issue, and a friend said a similar thing in regards to a timing mistake at nationals. But they don’t really make it known to us the members and the riders just what they are up to.
Is it worth it? I'd say yes just to have a united cycling body that all clubs operate is worth it. Without it we'd end up like the USA with countless organizations trying to be the rulers of their specific clubs, and events... Being able to run there own rules, with their own agenda and the like.
Last edited:
Cul is right perhaps we need the MTBA site to have more info rather than just the national rounds, but s/he is on the money with the idea that we need a united body. Questioning the existence of a body and why we pay money to it is all very well but is only relevant if we suggest ways to make the organization progress. Otherwise it becomes a destructive ego stroking exercise. There are people out there without sufficient cerebral focus who believe that xc and dh should be dropped in favour of enduro and 4x. Without the range of events that clubs offer we would have very few racing. To say that xc does not attract too many, is simply fallacy. Sparrow Hill Tour xc race over 300 starters for a club race. Yes we need MTBA to make sense out of some of the misrepresentations that are out there, and ensure that the interests of ALL riders are considered.