I'm going to ask you to jumpstart your imagination and take yourself to a time and a world where mountain biking is a little more complicated than it might currently be for you, and where your beloved sport can't be enjoyed by simply rolling off to your local trailhead like it ain't no big thing. No, this is a sad state of affairs where you have to actually pay money in order to have any sort of trail access whatsoever, be it your local jumps, cross-country singletracks, or your favourite downhill courses. Nothing about those zones change - the jumps that you session all the time are the same, and the trails remain unchanged and looked after in the same manner that they currently are - but you now have to pay up with cash or by sliding your card every time you want to enjoy them. Hopefully we're all thinking about the far-off future rather than anything that's on the horizon, because that's a picture that makes most of our current situations look pretty damn good, doesn't it?
What if this was the scene at every trailhead? Photo Brad Walton
There are plenty of privately owned riding locations around the world that already that do exactly this, usually known as bike parks, but would you ride as often as you do now if you had to pay for
every ride that you head out on? Let's say that each ride costs you $10 USD, or you could purchase a 'season pass' for, say, $800, all of which was put back into the trails. That sounds like a lot of money, but you'd beat the break-even point after eighty rides, after which you'd be rolling for free. If that was the case, how often would you ride? Would it be any less than you already do? Let me put it this way: if mountain biking was more like lift accessed skiing and snowboarding, which is how the large majority of people enjoy those two sports, would it affect how much you take part?
Like a lot of you, mountain biking long ago left the hobby stage and attained lifestyle status for me, and, without trying to sound like too much of a crazy preacher guy holding a big book and spraying spittle on everyone in the first row, there's not much that could keep me from getting on the trails. Not much, that is, except having to pay every time I wanted to enjoy my sport. It's got nothing to do with money, though... Now, given that we require the right equipment and often have to perform a bunch of maintenance, it's true that mountain biking isn't free per say, but there's something about being able to head out on a ride, for whatever reason you have for doing it, that's just so damn right about our sport. I don't know if it would have the same appeal to me if I had to pay money each and every time I wanted to do that. What about you?
Depending on your income $10 per trip (per person?) can either be inconsequential, or a deciding factor. While I could certainly afford it, and would like to have fewer people on the trails, charging per use has societal implications I'm not comfortable with.
if you had to pay every time you ride it would ruine the reputation of the sport!
go do something else!
i pay everytime i go to a bike park too but thats just for the lift acess.
@corywilliam yea i agree.
www.chasetrails.co.uk
You may as well create a poll if you would like zero gravity spots on trails if technology was there (yes, no, I ride DH for gravity), or would you risk riding a sick trail even if hypotheticaly space monkeys were killing people on it.
Apparently that biking thing is pretty fun as lots of people pay up to 40-50 euros to ride for a day..
This kind of thing is one of the greatest degenerations of our society, a tax for nature access which is not even progressive, so it will weight nothing on the wealthy and be an entry barrier for the poor.
We get hammered with tax the moment we get paid, we get hammered with tax the moment we spend, hammered with tax if we're fortunate enough to actually have any money left at the end of the month to save....
We pay but we dont get play.
There is a really famous tax case involving Astrid Lindgren (the Lady who wrote a lot of famous kids novels) were she paid over 100% in marginal tax rate on one of her projects. And sometimes for the hell of it the big man throws in a tax on tax deal! So if you think you have it bad you can rejoice in the fact that there is some who get the stick even further up in rear.
The only really good for mtbing in Sweden is our "allemans rätt" which gives bikers and hikers the freedom to walk and bike where ever they want out in the nature under the restriction that you dont do any substantial damage. But these days most trails get over grown and your playground shrinks every year.
There was one article about a politician a few years ago that went into early retirement payed for by taxes. At around 35. Seriously? Just recently one politician claimed that he should get more decution/subsidized becuase he put his job on the line every fourth year when we have election which he deemed unfair compared to regular Joes. Again seriously? Even with our relative extensive workers protection, a worker that has been permanently highered can be laid off in six months. A lot of people can be laid off in a week or so. And during those four years he is guranteed his 2x wage.
And mean while politicians claim that politicians need to have high wages and benefits to attract competence. A competent worker can always find work but politicians that are in the parliament have around two years of payed wage after they leave. So what are they competent go getters or hobos that cant get off their ass? A normal worker has again six months pay but at roughly 80% of normal wage.
But yeah pretty girls all around for miles! Just need to export a few with me when I move!
Also did I mention the weather sucks too. They were showeling snow of the chairs on june 22 and again on sep 23. So yeah it kind of sucks for dh too.
Payed over 4300 USD for my 2012 V10c. So yes everyone can be calm when they feel ripped off, someone else is getting more ripped off!
Bah its well past time to move to somewhere were the trails actually has dirt year round and the weather isnt grey 90% of the year!
Spend your money on tools and go BUILD.
Secretly, even though the majority says "no", when push comes to shove, I bet they would. We already pay for overpriced bikes, overpriced equipment and apparel (its only a matter of time before summer passes and lift tickets cost as much as winter). When it comes down to it, yes, they will all pay to play. Even if the number of people that comprise "all" is far fewer than it is now...
I used to work in a ski shop and I heard once that half of the price of a lift ticket was liability insurance. Anyone confirm?
China Camp state park in Marin County ALREADY charges a $3 day use fee.
What you get for your money is smoothed out single track that is really just narrow fire road.
I used to ride there regularly, but now it is at the bottom of my list.
I'd want to see:
A ) lift/shuttle access for DH runs
B ) guaranteed XC/AM trail access for a large amount of the year (obviously there would be down time for maintenance).
C ) plans to introduce more trails.
I already spend about $10-20 in fuel on a shuttle day with my friends as it is (any DH trails are at least an hour from my house.) so if someone were able to provide me with a cheaper alternative I'd be happy.
if you ride any public lands, we already pay city/county/state taxes to access these lands. Most [not all] of the trail heads around here, you have to pay 25bucks a year to park your car.
Hunters/fishers have all kinds of, fees/regulations/seasons of access.. But they also require a whole infrastructure to mange fish/game, so it is a little different.. But all their fees support their own system.
I wouldn't pay if I was also expected to dig though. One or the other. I'm happy to dig for my ride and have volunteered many hours to dig before now but if I'm paying then I'm paying to ride, not to dig. There are unfortunately some spots near me that are pay to ride but also have a no dig no ride policy as well (not a voluntary dig day every now and then thing either).
I'm not sure if that's what this article was getting at but even if cycling was taxed in a similar way that motor vehicles are taxed then I'd still ride just as often as I do now. With reference to the last sentence of the article I'd even go as far as to argue that if you consider MTB part of your lifestyle but would stop riding if you had to pay to ride trails then it's not really part of your lifestyle at all.
I would and have paid to ride at BPW for example but even if that was on my doorstep; you can't beat just getting on the bike and riding off somewhere under your own steam on natural terrain. I don't think I would become a park rat....maybe I'm too old already!
I already pay upwards of $18,000 per year to play in the dirt at my farm. And I still don't have enough time to get everything done that I want.
Charge to ride trails? 2 things will happen:
Empty forests & packed roads.
Rant yes, however this artical sparks a nerve that I can realistically foresee in this State.
If you go the "season pass" type route, it's really no different than say a hunting license. It would just simply be a biking license rather than a "pass" so much.
Really the biggest question is regulation and management once you get that far.
I put in a couple hundred hours of trail maintenance a season. As I understand; it BLM gives a dollar amount per hour for my time. lets just say it is $6 an hour (hypothetically) x 200+ hours = $1200 I contribute every season. This next year BLM was able to secure a Trail Crew to build a majority of a new trail we have planned. It's the sweat equity the trail maintainers put in that make them useful for all.
Im pretty sure the Department of Interior/BLM get their funding for energy/mineral/grazing rights that they charge money for; that in turn we pay for in daily life thru the meat we cook with energy in metal pans...... and such
Locally we have many clubs who ask for voluntary memberships to fund trail building. One local group produces more new trail and does more maintenance than can possibly be funded by their club collections. I'm happy to give them $40/yr since we are getting multiple km's of new or rerouted technical single track each year. In fact I donate more than the minimum because my work/life schedule doesn't allow me to make much time to volunteer on build days.
Conversely, another local club tried the strong-arm approach of requiring riders to pay-to-play on crown land (under the guise of insurance reasons) and there was a huge backlash online, rider traffic decreased and at the end of the day they aren't bringing in enough money to execute their trail plans.
Universal pay-to-play would destroy our sport. Ridership decreases, fewer new riders and over time you'd see amalgamation of land management groups which could ultimately lead to fewer, homogenous trails only accessible through ever-increasing fees.
Here's a better idea: have every bicycle and component manufacturer donate 1% of gross revenues to trail building clubs to cover operating costs and insurance. We'd see more trails popping up around the world than we could ride in a lifetime.
I'm against doing it for all good/decent trails. having a couple in every state is cool
Would I ride less? Yeah, probably. Casual hour-long weekday rides would mostly end for me. I would also have probably never started riding in the first place.
Riding the roads here is also not a great option because most people drive their cars like retards
I think in the 2 weeks I have been here I have had at least as many sketchy situations with cars as I have in a 6 month period in Amsterdam. They are often too busy texting or doing any other thing you can think of instead of actually keeping their eyes on the road.
Im also all for road bikes paying registration to ride on the roads once per year like I have to do on all my cars. There should be a licence plate system so cops can actually enforce bad road behavior and broken rules. Having bikes fly past a school bus with flashing lights ar 40mph deserves a ticket. Cops won't ticket them currently.
I definitely wouldn't.
"
But, here in Indonesia almost (90%) track is free.
Other trails: No
Oh yeah and then they surely don't need that much maintenance to stay in good shape and they won't be destroyed by forest office because of trail abuse.
you get the point?