climberman wrote: KNP is a wonderful example of this potential, there are some great rides accessible there; the only legal cycling in a dedicated 'wilderness' (whatever that is) area in NSW.
Climberman, G'day. Happily, this is not strictly so, talking about NSW. The Bicentennial National Trail is a multi-use trail. If a MTB rider is capable of handling the terrain, where the trail crosses so-called dedicated wilderness, they/MTBs are able to. In the NP Bikes in Parks Act (revised in 2002 and currently being revised again) on page 3, 'bikes can be pushed or carried on walking tracks'. I do check before hand if I need access, I've always been given the OK by NSW and ACT National Parks Rangers.
I've not ever been able to come to grips with what NPs call a dedicated wilderness or a NEW wilderness or a gazetted wilderness ... I like the 250,000,000 year old wilderness, the traditional wilderness. There is a lot of it still out there.
Here in the ACT the so-called wilderness is only the catchment of the storage dams and finishes along the western ACT/NSW Border. Dropping over the western edge of the Brindies is no longer being in a wilderness? OK that is interesting knowing that Wilderness stops at survey cairns and at lines on a map.
I don't think anywhere in the Eastern States on the mainland meets UNESCO's criteria for wilderness. Maybe the word Wilderness should be titled NP's scaled-down-wilderness-pakages.
Following other comments;
MTBs do not cause the significant damage to the natural environment and trails that is though. The popular misconceptions about the negative social impacts of sharing trails would also have us believe that all trail user groups dislike other trail user groups. They are just that, all misconceptions.
The damage to the environment was done when the trail was originally made. The New Zealand Dept of Agriculture and the Dept of Conservation and thirdly (I think?) Sport and Recreation, have carried out extensive research into this. It was found that a bike's rolling weight has little impact on the ground, even less than the impact caused by heavily laden walkers. The major impact is caused to the environment when user groups get shut out of areas and then no one reports on the state of the conditions and then the maintenance or rehabilitation, is then not timely. A perfect example was closing the trails in the Gibraltar Ranges when the range was declared a World Heritage Park. The only major plant that has re-established itself on the closed trails there is Lantana.
How unpredictable! Like the Senior Ranger said to me, about the conditions, "We don't have the time to go and check what is happening." We users did it for them!
This is the New Zealand Dept of Conservation's Report ...
http://www.followscience.com/groups_rep ... _frt6g.pdf The thought about walkers always having access, so maybe we don't need to front up to conferences, we're OK, then think again. The UNESCO programmes, 'Sustainable Environments' and 'Man and the Biosphere' are coming to a region near you, if not already. Count the proliferation of Biospheres, especially in the US and here in Oz. The Biospheres will only work towards the ideal when they are linked with wildlife corridors ... and made only accessible to land managers, and wildlife and environmental research officers. It is happening by degrees in the US and is becoming a major issue to traditional user groups.
Have you ever read the 'Bicycle and the Bush' by Jim Fitzpatrick or about the exploits of Francis Birtles who circumnavigated the continent twice and crossed the continent seven times before formed roads ... it is not just horses and feet that are a traditional mode of transportation in the bush. Before anyone thinks a bicycle is a mechanical means of transportation and so doesn't belong in the bush, shoes give a mechanical advantage too, so do walking poles.
There is something else that is little known about the traditional use of bikes, where our national parks now are. Not all shepherds and drovers drove their flocks and herds on horseback many used the bicycle because they couldn't afford horses. Same with shearers and other rural workers. In NSW when many of the Travelling Stock Routes on the Great Dividing Range were decommissioned they became major sections of National Parks. No one complained then that bicycles did harm. Once I rode a bike along the Main Range and the two Park Rangers I met were impressed. Now we can't even ride to the summit of Kosci' or along the range without incurring fines, in the thousands of dollars.
NPA is part of the Stock Route Coalition attempting to help save these priceless ribbons of genetic inheritance. Vids from some of the key speeches given at the NPA's July conference about the preservation of the TSRs ...
http://www.youtube.com/npansw#p/u/0/NO3El7cVt6gWarren.
.
.
