J@se
Breezeway Bandit
Lol, yeah, I don't know why Stavros came to mind, it just seemed appropriate.Was that the Kojak School of Paraphrasing you attended?
Cheers to all who attended last night.
National Parks trail access: Have your say
- Thread starter pi11wizard
- Start date
Cheers to all who attended last night.
hifiandmtb
Sphincter beanie
I attended the Sutherland meeting last night & was surprised & impressed with the general positivity shown. There was a vast-majority understanding that mountain biker's needs should be met & shutting down access will achieve nothing.
Personally, I didn't have an issue with the "wilderness envrionmentalist" set who pretty much wanted to ban bikes from NPWS-managed areas as it was interesting to hear their arguments, in that I found them poorly constructed & weak...and that they didn't seem to properly understand the true intent of the "Mountain Bike Discussion Paper". They are not doing themselves any favours by acting in this way.
Necessarily, the exclusion of downhill mountain bike trails was brought up as again - exclusion of a user group won't stop illegal trail building. Quite how this issue is addressed is unknown as I can't see it being added to the current NPWS agenda.
It was commented at the end of the meeting that this was one of the most constructive & positive gatherings yet held. I hope that there is growing momentum to achieve great outcomes after all the input obtained so far - monetary funding seems to be the biggest stumbling block.
Personally, I didn't have an issue with the "wilderness envrionmentalist" set who pretty much wanted to ban bikes from NPWS-managed areas as it was interesting to hear their arguments, in that I found them poorly constructed & weak...and that they didn't seem to properly understand the true intent of the "Mountain Bike Discussion Paper". They are not doing themselves any favours by acting in this way.
Necessarily, the exclusion of downhill mountain bike trails was brought up as again - exclusion of a user group won't stop illegal trail building. Quite how this issue is addressed is unknown as I can't see it being added to the current NPWS agenda.
It was commented at the end of the meeting that this was one of the most constructive & positive gatherings yet held. I hope that there is growing momentum to achieve great outcomes after all the input obtained so far - monetary funding seems to be the biggest stumbling block.
Delmar
Likes Dirt
Sutho Report
Well not really a report, just a few points that stand out in my mind:
- We were well represented in terms of numbers, although I thought there might have been more of us there. Certainly those from various environmental and walking groups were well outnumbered.
- For the most part mtb speakers did really well: respectful, coherant, looking for or appealing for common ground, applauding the draft. Chatting to the NPWS reps afterward, this was appreciated. (We won the clap-o-meter for sure!)
- The point was well made re garrawarra and the illawarra escarpment being largely ignored in the paper. Michael from NWPS went to the trouble of sticking his hand up and saying he agreed, given the discussion papers brief re large population centres it was strange the gong was excluded. No action was suggested by him, but this was heartening nonetheless.
- DH guys made point well re mitigating illegal trails with well built legal stuff, esp the guy near the end (nerf herder?).
- Colin of playschool fame even spoke for MTB! My kids would have been chuffed as!
Big point for me:
- Speakers expressing concern about MTB ranged from thoughtful and helpful to plain ill-informed. It concerned me that thier position (opposing) was substantially or almost entirely based on supposition and mis-information as to who rides bikes and why. A charicature of stunts, extreme, thrill seeking, young punk bush shredding seemed to be dominant for some speakers. There was a false dichotomy (pointed to a couple of times) drawn between enjoying riding and enjoying the bush. Viz: 'you can't be looking around and enjoy the bush whilst riding over a rock.' This is simplistic/plain wrong. In other words I don't think you need to be stopped and looking directly at a tree to enjoy it. I have a constant awareness of enjoyment of peace/smells/'I love being out here and not on some road with a truck on my hip' even if I'm pushing it at 90% MHR. Don't know about you guys. I digress!
I think the truth is that MTB and walkers overlap massively in terms of what we enjoy (being out in the bush), and our concern to help preserve it (we don't want to trash the place). We have a proven record for being willing to help, willing to be educated, happy to share repectfully and so on. It's a great shame to me that some opposing can't see us as potentially great allies for thier agendas.
I chatted to the Anthony Burton (Chair) about this misconception, and the need to educate people as to what we're on about/who we are, and what forums could be helpful (these consultation sessions only go so far). He agreed it would be good for all stake holders to learn more about each other, and would 'give it thought'.
It gave me a wake up call that I can presume very little as to people's knowledge of what we do and appreciate etc. We need to keep plugging away to portray ourselves well, patiently and respectfully, out on the trail and elsewhere.
Even then, there'll be people who willfully ignore facts and just oppose no matter what. There was a bit of crazy talk last night along those lines (the lady who spoke against us by talking about all the damage done to the coast walk over the years... which has been by walkers?!). Smile politely and move along...
But all in all, I came away pretty encouraged. The NPWS people made it clear that the strongly anti MTB people/groups don't steer the ship (just as we don't). I guess the proof is the riding, but it's all going in the right direction IMO.
Maybe others can fill in more detail.
Well not really a report, just a few points that stand out in my mind:
- We were well represented in terms of numbers, although I thought there might have been more of us there. Certainly those from various environmental and walking groups were well outnumbered.
- For the most part mtb speakers did really well: respectful, coherant, looking for or appealing for common ground, applauding the draft. Chatting to the NPWS reps afterward, this was appreciated. (We won the clap-o-meter for sure!
)- The point was well made re garrawarra and the illawarra escarpment being largely ignored in the paper. Michael from NWPS went to the trouble of sticking his hand up and saying he agreed, given the discussion papers brief re large population centres it was strange the gong was excluded. No action was suggested by him, but this was heartening nonetheless.
- DH guys made point well re mitigating illegal trails with well built legal stuff, esp the guy near the end (nerf herder?).
- Colin of playschool fame even spoke for MTB! My kids would have been chuffed as!
Big point for me:
- Speakers expressing concern about MTB ranged from thoughtful and helpful to plain ill-informed. It concerned me that thier position (opposing) was substantially or almost entirely based on supposition and mis-information as to who rides bikes and why. A charicature of stunts, extreme, thrill seeking, young punk bush shredding seemed to be dominant for some speakers. There was a false dichotomy (pointed to a couple of times) drawn between enjoying riding and enjoying the bush. Viz: 'you can't be looking around and enjoy the bush whilst riding over a rock.' This is simplistic/plain wrong. In other words I don't think you need to be stopped and looking directly at a tree to enjoy it. I have a constant awareness of enjoyment of peace/smells/'I love being out here and not on some road with a truck on my hip' even if I'm pushing it at 90% MHR. Don't know about you guys. I digress!
I think the truth is that MTB and walkers overlap massively in terms of what we enjoy (being out in the bush), and our concern to help preserve it (we don't want to trash the place). We have a proven record for being willing to help, willing to be educated, happy to share repectfully and so on. It's a great shame to me that some opposing can't see us as potentially great allies for thier agendas.
I chatted to the Anthony Burton (Chair) about this misconception, and the need to educate people as to what we're on about/who we are, and what forums could be helpful (these consultation sessions only go so far). He agreed it would be good for all stake holders to learn more about each other, and would 'give it thought'.
It gave me a wake up call that I can presume very little as to people's knowledge of what we do and appreciate etc. We need to keep plugging away to portray ourselves well, patiently and respectfully, out on the trail and elsewhere.
Even then, there'll be people who willfully ignore facts and just oppose no matter what. There was a bit of crazy talk last night along those lines (the lady who spoke against us by talking about all the damage done to the coast walk over the years... which has been by walkers?!). Smile politely and move along...
But all in all, I came away pretty encouraged. The NPWS people made it clear that the strongly anti MTB people/groups don't steer the ship (just as we don't). I guess the proof is the riding, but it's all going in the right direction IMO.
Maybe others can fill in more detail.
Last edited:
Jackstack
Likes Dirt
Unfortunately I missed the first 45mins of the meeting last night, but from what I saw I was impressed with the way everyone conducted themselves and thought on the whole the Riding community that was there presented more informed on other park users needs than vice versa.
Delmar, I think your points encompass what the majority of people I know feel about the whole situation (funnily enough), its certainly the way I feel about it. A very good point you also made was the fact that we are actually on the environmentalist's side but unfortunately some just don't see it through misconception.
I also think the gent down the back (dark hair, goatie, sorry forgot your name) made a very valid point towards the end regarding what appears to be one of the anti-mtb lobby's big points. I kept hearing that the NPWS main purpose is conservation and the point made was, "who are we conserving it for?", and if conservation is alledgedly the only objective of NPWS then all user groups should be excluded from the parks. His points were articulated a lot better than that but I think you get the idea, nice speech mate.
Anyway that's all I've got to say, I think this will be a slow process but some positive signs are there.
Delmar, I think your points encompass what the majority of people I know feel about the whole situation (funnily enough), its certainly the way I feel about it. A very good point you also made was the fact that we are actually on the environmentalist's side but unfortunately some just don't see it through misconception.
I also think the gent down the back (dark hair, goatie, sorry forgot your name) made a very valid point towards the end regarding what appears to be one of the anti-mtb lobby's big points. I kept hearing that the NPWS main purpose is conservation and the point made was, "who are we conserving it for?", and if conservation is alledgedly the only objective of NPWS then all user groups should be excluded from the parks. His points were articulated a lot better than that but I think you get the idea, nice speech mate.
Anyway that's all I've got to say, I think this will be a slow process but some positive signs are there.
crank1979
Likes Bikes and Dirt
It was a very interesting evening. Much more heated than the Nowra one I also attended which didin't seem to have anyone opposing the discussion paper present. It all seemed to work out though. I did feel a bit sorry for the poor lady talking about the sand.
The guy from the National Parks Association (the very first speaker) spoke very well and raised some valid points. I thought the mtber who replied directly afterwards spoke just as well and answered his concerns in a good way. There is obviously a clear lack of understanding on the part of the NPA reps regarding what mtbers want and how we behave - bike lanes on management/fire trails!
The guy from the National Parks Association (the very first speaker) spoke very well and raised some valid points. I thought the mtber who replied directly afterwards spoke just as well and answered his concerns in a good way. There is obviously a clear lack of understanding on the part of the NPA reps regarding what mtbers want and how we behave - bike lanes on management/fire trails!
crank1979
Likes Bikes and Dirt
What was special about yesterday that I'm missing?
Over 100 comments submitted yesterday. Great work by all the mtbers!
https://mountainbiking.discussions.nsw.gov.au/
Less than 10 days to go now.
Over 100 comments submitted yesterday. Great work by all the mtbers!
https://mountainbiking.discussions.nsw.gov.au/
Less than 10 days to go now.
dcrofty
Eats Squid
Thats Steve, AKA Wiffle on here. Excellent speaker, considered, respectful and made some great points. Top work.
crank1979
Likes Bikes and Dirt
Steve spoke brilliantly, especially his final point. Very impressive. The first person though was the larger (sorry) bloke in the very back row. Someone told me his name yesterday but I've forgotten it, sorry.
I think the guys making the points about DHers were J@se (correct spelling) and Nerf Herder.
Nerf Herder
Wheel size expert
This is a good point and I've been trying to think of a non bike example and the best I can do is a tourist drive.
When your travelling along down the freeway and your not that much in a rush or in a new section you've either never been too or its been a long time since the last visit ... I know of several tourist drives that my family take both up the north coast and down the south coast that we'll drive just to enjoy the twisting roads through some incredible forests ... the massive trees and sometimes the panoramic views are also awesome and really make you think (shite there must be some trails in here
nah ... ). on odd occasions there are stops and look outs that we can also enjoyAlternatively, driving through diary country and seeing the green rolling hills.
The macro aspects of scenery are just as important as the micro aspects of focusing on any one thing. Just recently one of my tracks was a seas of yellow from the wattles and flying down the track the blur of yellow was incredible.
Similarly, whilst walking the proposed trails we are working on with council The staff member educated us in how the bell mynas were killing the / thinning the the canopy because of their territorial nature of driving out the other insect eaters and the insects multiplying leading to the thinning and killing of the grey gums and other species. Fark I would have never known that if I wasn't out trying to secure more DH and XC trails.
So many wins
I think we have a more hands on approach ... well some of us anyway.
When you think you have numbers or strength or more influence ... it is the easiest and most common way to demonise(sp) those you oppose ... you don't need to compromise then.
Its when your finally shown the opposition has more numbers and influence that you learn that compromise is best.
Up to us to show numbers now or wait another 10 years or so
new catch phrase "I Dig It... I Ride in It ... I Help Conserve National Parks"