I've been wondering how to approach this very broad subject as a whole as I've been wanting to write about it for a while. Ever since lockdown in fact when everyone was shaming everyone else for Biking, Riding, Walking, Running, Climbing and all kinds of other sports more than 5 miles from their house. Or in later months 5 miles from their local health board boundary. I think there's actually a few things I want to externalise on this subject so I may just write a few "parts" To get it all out there. So if you like, take this one as "Part 1"
Who actually owns the outdoors? Well, it's a paradox. But the quick answer is "not you" and "not me" From a legal point of view. Though, like it or not, legally, we have landowners who in Scotland have a duty to make that land safe for existing responsible access whilst protecting their investment from damage or potential user group liability. Ethically however I think we all have a right to the outdoors as long as we are not physically damaging the environment, doing anything illegal, infringing on anyones livelihood or putting others in a dangerous or potentially liable position.
What we used to need; the reciprocal cooperation of our nearest fellow apes has been replaced with a different thing.
Simple right? Well no, not really, because we're human beings. We love ownership. We have evolved tribal brains not wired to interact with the needs and opinions of others on such a global scale like we do online now. We're really "in-group" types. What we used to need; the reciprocal cooperation of our nearest fellow apes has been replaced with a different thing. Validation, ego, the need to be seen as the last opinion on any given subject or the arbiter of which behaviours are accepted and MUST be displayed by all who dare to challenge. The only problem is that there are huge swathes of those challengers who feel the same about their own opinion. Thus the unstoppable force reaches the immovable object.
I was inspired to write further in this blog by reading this short thought provoking peice on Adventure Journal. Was the author right? Who knows but his points are certainly subjectively valid.
For me in my primary sport of mountain biking, it's hand-built or "natural" trails for the most part. For the most part and in a broad stroke of cases, we have no real god given (or legal) right to dig them and no right to name them. We don't ask for permission, we don't take any of the responsibility or consider the environmental impact and we cause by doing so. We don't assess them or build them to an objectively accessible or graded standard and then after all that don't take any responsibility for the liability or consequences of creating the above. Such hubris is rarely seen in any other walk of life.
Let me stop you here though: Although I have never been out and dug an unauthorised trail, I am an avid user of said trails. Which does not make me a hypocrite, but it does make me an enabler and part of the problem. I love hand built trails, I really do. They enrich our sport and give the more advanced rider a chance to test themselves at a higher, more technical standard. We simply cannot do without the building of these trails at the "enthusiast" end of mountain biking. For the most part, at least in my area, the natural trails built here are the work of seasoned and talented, peerless trail builders. In short, they are world class.
So what's my point? Well, I'm not sure actually? I'm going to leave it to the last few paragraphs to summarise what I think we can do to improve the situation. I've been writing this in fits and starts for a few weeks now, so what I can at least do is tell you what prompted me to do so.
It was the simple circulation of a picture. A sign I've looked dozens of times on a trail in Innerleithen locally know as "Angry Bird" So let me explain. But first though, here's the picture.
So this seems reasonable right? Who would think that someone should be able to take credit for someone else's hard work and hang the name of their choice on it. Under normal circumstances I would agree. Though this sign encapsulated the hypocrisy and common misunderstanding of the nuance involved in trail building. Especially in Scotland where we have the "right to roam" a term which is both contributory to the problem and wholly inaccurate with regards to SOAC (The Scottish Outdoor Access Code / Scottish Land Reform act 2003)
Now take the reasonable assertion written on this sign given ideal circumstances. Now overlay it on the considerations I listed in the second paragraph of this blog. To save time and an upwards scroll, lets consider the following in the context of this particular trail. (as far as I know)
The trail name. This trail had had a few names the worst offender being "Not for Poofs" Which is just socially and ethically unacceptable. I don't know who thought this was ok? This name is shared with the whole world through apps like Strava and Trailforks. it was also named, "Not For Slomophobes" then "Not For Hoofs"and "Not For Everyone" and now "Not for Homophobes" All of which is largely irrelevant because the trail is universally known as "Angry Bird" Because thats the one that stuck. More on this later.
The landowner. The landowner is Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS). No one asked if they could build this trail. They just decided that they would vandalise someone else's property and imprint their version of what they think this piece of land should look like based on their own desires and motives.
The liability. As I understand it based on a simple interpretation of the available information. If you own land and someone hurts themselves on something you're unaware of then you can hardly be held accountable? However, If you know that something about that land has changed and can potentially be hazardous, then you have a legal obligation to make that land safe for whomever can legally access it. When FLS found this trail, they immediately became responsible for the liability.
The Environment. Why Angry Bird? well because for a good chunk of the year some buzzards come and nest here frequently buzzing riders and filling the air with their stressful calls in defence of their nests. The landowner has signposted this trail as shut many times when this has been the case though people just ride past the sign and continue to use it.
The cost. Something as stupid as the nails this sign is hammered in with can cost FLS thousands. When trees are dropped and sawn, nails and screws can damage blades and equipment causing whole crops to be abandoned for fear of repeating these issues. This is why you'll see bungees and specifically mounted signage commonly used instead. What about paying the staff that must take on the responsibility of assessing the trail? This is also a factor. Also, when that sign falls down, who picks it up? What if it hits someone or then someone steps on a nail. Who takes the blame...?
The risk. FLS simply do not have the manpower to police any of this. Trails pop up so fast and the political nature of the FLS's obligation to local communities and recreational users mostly prevents this stuff from becoming cost effective to assess or put right. So it gets left with no-one to control the legacy, the upkeep, the environment or enough of any type of remedial action that would remove the liability for them.
Now imagine for a second this was all happening in YOUR back yard. Land that you own and are held responsible for.
The above isn't even necessarily my opinion either, more of a bastardised mix of all the chat I hear on a very regular basis.
In conclusion: I'm not for a minute taking the moral high ground here, you'll just have to take me at my word that I'm trying to be objective. The above isn't even necessarily my opinion either, more of a bastardised mix of all the chat I hear on a very regular basis. To reiterate, I love hand built trails, the people who build (the good ones) are very skilled at knowing what a broad section of riders want from them and I wish we could circumvent all the red tape and have more of them with better management alongside.
If you're a trail builder reading this, please don't get your pants in a bunch. I support you in what you're trying to achieve and I'm grateful for your work!
But change is afoot. You can help in the way all of the above is interpreted, acted upon and seen by both the public eye and in the mountain biking community by getting in touch, donating or actually turning up for a dig day via a local trails association. I won't touch on legalities, terms and conditions or what they do specifically as they all have their own constitutions and memorandums of understanding with landowners.
If you're a trail builder reading this, please don't get your pants in a bunch. I support you in what you're trying to achieve and I'm grateful for your work!
The two pioneering trail associations in Scotland are.
Aberdeenshire Trail Association: https://www.aberdeenshiretrail.org
Tweed Valley Trails Association: https://www.tweedvalleytrails.org
You can also read more about how to approach building trails in your local area (in Scotland) and the work that has previously gone into improving the communication between landowners and builders in the Land Access Forums guide here.
Thanks for reading. See you out there.
Allan
Comments