Calgary Mountain Bike Alliance - Fish Creek Open House

This action alert was for the November 1998 open house, but it shows what we were up against

Well, you already attended the Open House right? Here's the background on the Fish Creek situation. It's not too late to help save our trails in Fish Creek.

Fish Creek Provincial Park is in the process of developing an undesignated trails policy. The Calgary Mountain Bike Alliance has been asked to be a part of a steering committee that will formulate trail policy for Fish Creek. Things are not going well.

In spite of our involvement, it seems many of our favorite Fish Creek trails are destined for closure. We fear that the Fish Creek example may be adopted by other administrations (civic, provincial, federal) in justifying future trail closures elsewhere. We need members to attend Fish Creek Open Houses on November 19 and November 21 to ensure our voice is heard and to prevent the uneccesary closure of trails.

In a nutshell, Fish Creek Management decides what trails will be available to cyclists.

A "filter system" will be used as a "trail evaluation tool" to determine which trails are affected. The "filter" looks at slope and soil concerns, standing water and drainage issues, water mobility and historically and biologically significant areas and safety concerns.

Fish Creek Provincial Park Management has proposed that all trails in Fish Creek with a grade in excess of 25% (that's a mere 14 degrees folks!) BE CLOSED TO ALL USERS!

Why 25% or 14 degrees? Fish Creek says they obtained this figure from the IMBA (International Mountain Bike Alliance) trail guide. We note that IMBA's 25% recommendation is for NEW trails and IMBA points out that 25% was chosen because above this level there is POTENTIAL for erosion (but not erosion necessarily).

IMBA doesn't recommend closing trails in excess of 25 degrees so why should Fish Creek? There are alternatives to closure such as regular maintenance, which CMBA has volunteered to do! Why not try to remove the POTENTIAL for erosion rather than simply closing everything above 25%? Why not try trail rotation in which trails are used for a period of years and then reclaimed? Have ecological education initiatives been considered before closure initiatives? Do we really need to close trails before trying anything else?

What measuring standards are being used? Average slope? Maximum slope? Over what length of trail? A meter or two? The whole trail? These factors all affect the final slope determination. How many people are measuring these slopes? One person? Is this adequate? (No!)

Why is a broadly defined "filter" being used when individual trail inspection would provide much more information with respect to safety and ecological concerns? Proactive maintenance (which CMBA has volunteered to do) can eliminate ecological and safety concerns before they are a problem.

The "filter" has already proven that some trails that SHOULD be closed for ecological reasons will remain open and some that should remain open will be closed. Maybe we need to come up with another evaluation tool? Individual trail inspection for instance.

How are trail closures going to be enforced? How, by whom and who is going to pay for it?

How much impact will the public consultation process (the Open Houses) affect the future Fish Creek policy? How much authority will the Fish Creek Undesignated Trails Committee have vs. public input?

Should trails be "designated" (formally identified) at all? If trails remain "undesignated," there is an assumption of risk on the part of the trail user. Once "designated" and formalized, does Fish Creek not assume some liability for the safety of its users? Once a trail is designated, would Fish Creek be obligated to go into every trail and ensure there are adequate "sight lines" at every corner? Would they have to "red shale" every trail in the park to ensure there is zero possibility of potential liability? Does anyone want this to happen in his or her "natural areas"?

What are "safety concerns?" How are they defined? The most often cited rational used by Fish Creek has been "safe trails for the average rider." What is an unsafe trail? What is a safe trail? What is an average rider? Who makes this determination?

What maintenance standards are currently in place for Fish Creek? Is there a volunteer coordinator for Fish Creek? What can Fish Creek do to facilitate volunteer efforts? CMBA has members that are more than willing to come out and do trail maintenance. Why not give it a try?

We need to show Fish Creek that we are a responsible and diverse demographic group and we are willing to compromise. With this in mind, CMBA has taken the position that we should not ride areas where there are valid ecological concerns.

Additionally, CMBA feels that the super steep stuff in Fish Creek should be avoided and we are willing as an organization to give up this type of riding in Fish Creek as part of a compromise for logical trail policy application. Example: Don't close trails that don't NEED to be closed. Look to alternatives (education, maintenance, sound trail design etc.) before implementing trail closures and trail bans.

We need all members, even non-members; to come out to the Fish Creek Open Houses to voice your concerns over these proposed closures and suggest alternatives.

We ask all members to print this information and bring it with them to the open houses. Keep addressing the questions contained in this letter to the management of Fish Creek at the open houses and in the future.

Thursday, November 19, 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM

And

Saturday November 21 1:00 PM to 4:00 PM at Bow Valley Ranch in Fish Creek.

Directions
- Take Bow Bottom Trail south towards Lake Sikome
- 1st right after the Park entrance to the Administration Building
(Are these directions clear?)

YOUR right to ride depends on YOUR invovement in this initiative. See you there!