Trail conflict ?

I'm writing a term paper for one of my social sciences (Community Relations, to be exact) classes. I
need to gather some real life examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived) between
various types of trail users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic animals, native fauna, etc.) to
illustrate the issues of users groups /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of conflict
resolution would be especially useful.

Of course, I'll post my paper when it's done, as well.

--
John G. in Memphis, TN Have a nice......... night.
http://www.shavings.net/images/Memphis/reflect_john.jpg

 

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:16:40 -0600, MPD Blue wrote:
>
> I'm writing a term paper for one of my social sciences (Community Relations, to be exact) classes.
> I need to gather some real life examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived)
> between various types of trail users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic animals, native fauna,
> etc.) to illustrate the issues of users groups /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of
> conflict resolution would be especially useful.

I find LACK of conflict to be a far more common experience. But I guess there's no dramatic
story in that.

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

MPD Blue retorted :
> I'm writing a term paper for one of my social sciences (Community Relations, to be exact) classes.
> I need to gather some real life examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived)
> between various types of trail users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic animals, native fauna,
> etc.) to illustrate the issues of users groups /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of
> conflict resolution would be especially useful.
>
> Of course, I'll post my paper when it's done, as well.

1. shared use trail with people and dogs off leash running up to bike. Scary as hell.. do i hit the
dog, keep going and hope it gets out of the way? I always thank people when the dog is a) on a
leash or b) they are aware enough to call dog to heel.

2. runners on a mission moving downhill, towards rider going up hill. I know I"m supposed to yield
to them, but jeez, I'll loose what little momentum I may have...

3. I'm very careful, always dismount when I see horses. I loved it when one lady said, thanks.. but
my horse is an idiot, if he shies it's his problem and not mine.

4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have a clue about trail
ettiquette and set a poor example.

penny

 

Penny S wrote:
> 2. runners on a mission moving downhill, towards rider going up hill. I know I"m supposed to yield
> to them, but jeez, I'll loose what little momentum I may have...

Hmmm. I thought the "always yield to uphill traffic" supercedes the horse/hiker/biker hierarchy.

Bill "a /good/ runner would appreciate the effort of riding up something steep" S.

 

Penny S wrote:
> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have a clue about trail
> ettiquette and set a poor example.

Exactly, the point of my paper !-)

--
--
John G. in Memphis, TN Have a nice......... night.
http://www.shavings.net/images/Memphis/reflect_john.jpg

 

On 2004-02-22, Penny S penned:
> MPD Blue retorted :

Does it count as a retort if his was the first post?
>
> 2. runners on a mission moving downhill, towards rider going up hill. I know I"m supposed to yield
> to them, but jeez, I'll loose what little momentum I may have...

I don't get this one, either. I've definitely had runners coming downhill as I'm huffing, puffing,
barely keeping my legs moving ... they show no awareness of my existence, let alone my plight, so I
dismount ... and many times can't even get started up the hill again. WTF? I'm not even asking them
to stop; just run on the side of the path for a few feet. How hard is that? If I were running, I
would never force the uphill self-propelled individual to stop.

Then again, it's not just runners. I've had mountain bikers on their way downhill run me off the
road, too. Again, WTF? If anyone should be sympathetic, it should be them!

> 3. I'm very careful, always dismount when I see horses. I loved it when one lady said, thanks..
> but my horse is an idiot, if he shies it's his problem and not mine.

I dismount for horses. This is just common sense to me. I've never been kicked, but as a seven-year-
old I blacked out when a yearling accidentally rammed me with her shoulder. Learned my lesson then:
horses are bigger than me. No point in tempting fate.

So far, all the horse-riders I've met have been quite friendly.

> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have a clue about trail
> ettiquette and set a poor example.

Yes.

Then again, sometimes you get the wrong idea. My group of four was getting all steamed at the
trailhead because what looked like a group of dewbies was headed up the trail the wrong way -- but
turns out they just went a couple hundred feet up the hill the wrong way, then turned around and got
started. Just a warm-up.

Here's a story: my group is biking along when we see a crowd of elementary-age kids and their
guardians ahead. We slow down -- can't recall if we dismount or not, but in any case, an elderly
lady guardian thanks us profusely for actually stopping and not blasting through the group. This was
a positive experience for both groups, but her tone of surprise made me wonder how many dewbies were
rampaging through the area with no consideration whatsoever for the kids.

--
monique

 

On 2004-02-22, S o r n i penned:
> Penny S wrote:
>> 2. runners on a mission moving downhill, towards rider going up hill. I know I"m supposed to
>> yield to them, but jeez, I'll loose what little momentum I may have...
>
> Hmmm. I thought the "always yield to uphill traffic" supercedes the horse/hiker/biker hierarchy.

My understanding has been the opposite, but my sensibility has always been to yield to the
uphillers, and I'm always miffed when they don't.

After all, they post the hierarchy thing all over the place on the trails I ride, but they don't say
boo about the uphill thing.

> Bill "a /good/ runner would appreciate the effort of riding up something steep" S.

You'd think.

--
monique

 

"MPD Blue" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I'm writing a term paper for one of my social sciences (Community Relations, to be exact) classes.
> I need to gather some real life examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived)
> between various types of trail users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic animals, native fauna,
> etc.) to illustrate the issues of users groups /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of
> conflict resolution would be especially useful.
>
The equestrian/mtn bike friction and conflict on the carriage road system in Acadia National Park,
Maine, US. The truly unique system spreads through the eastern part of that park, on Mt Desert
Island, and runs outside of park boundaries onto private lands around Seal Harbor, (Rockefeller)
properties. Apparently an incident about 15 years ago (which I don't know the details on) resulted
in the closing of the private section to any kind of bicycling. Equestrians and hikers only.

Current solution, compromise:
1) Northern section of system, within the federal park,nearest Bar Harbor, NO equestrians, yes to
bikes and hikers.

2)Middle section of system, heart of Acadia. Bikers and equestrians coexist, with the usual
hierarchy of right of way granted to horses, bikes last. Works quite well, but some bad attitudes
on both sides occasionally show.

3) Southern, private section, No bikes.

Fortunately, I see little straying off the carriage roads by cyclists, or anyone else, as the
northern forest is thick in some places, and the fern ground cover is best left totally undisturbed.
I am not aware of any attempts at single tracking it on park hiking trails. Speed seems to be the
main complaint on the part of mountain bikers, on these sand/gravel bedded roads.

Since the no bikes area is not in the national park, and under management of private interests,
there is not much that can be done to change things here. Decisions made by the Rockefeller family
or their property management corporation usually stick. For a long time. And as the whole carriage
road system was largely the gift to the people by an earlier Rockefeller, folks are mostly not up to
a challenge on this.

I hope we cyclists can eventually "earn back" the priveledge of cycling on the private land, but I'm
not holding my breath.

 

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:29:05 -0600, MPD Blue wrote:
>
>
> Penny S wrote:
>> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have a clue about trail
>> ettiquette and set a poor example.
>
> Exactly, the point of my paper !-)

Outlaw assholes.

Sorry for my cynicism, but this is an old subject and if there were answers, they'd be pretty well
known by now.

Anyway, let's not forget the racer wannabes who think that multi-use singletrack is their personal
raceway. That's the only real "conflict" I've seen in 8 years of riding. I'm just not sure anyone
has come up with a way to deal with them, other than the well-deserved ass-whoopin. They're just as
dangerous to other riders as they are to hikers - this is NOT hiker/biker conflict. Considering that
bikers can't just jump aside like hikers can, these idiots are probably more dangerous to other
riders than they are to hikers.

There was one time a hiker stopped me to tell me I was on a trail that was off-limits to bikes. She
was wrong about that, but I didn't know for sure (I was new to the area), so I turned back. Chalk up
one to "perceived" conflict, though I'm not sure it was "conflict" since I did what she wanted.

So two cases in some 500+ rides - less than 0.4% conflict (0.2% if you only count actual conflict).

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 20:01:47 -0500, Scott L Hadley wrote:

> The equestrian/mtn bike friction and conflict on the carriage road system in Acadia National Park,
> Maine, US.

John (original poster), have you ever though about looking at these from the perspective of
LOCATION? One thing that is (frustratingly) unique to my area is an almost complete lack of
singletrack riding in and near town. The largest park only allows hiking on virtually all of the
singletrack (there are many miles of multi-use fireroad). Conflict in this park is extremly rare,
even though its VERY heavily used. Conflict on the trails several miles from town is pretty much
unheard of, AFAIK.

Where I lived near Dallas, there was singletrack surrounded by suburbs. There was a lot of potential
for conflict, and in one year's riding that's the only time I saw it (none in 7 years riding in
Portland).

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

There are all sorts, hikers, bikers, equestrians alike. I was hiking a section of the Pacific Crest
Trail recently east of San Diego and was politely told by a group of equistrians that this trail was
for horses only, what gall! I've come across bikers while hiking on many a non-bike trail and was
always given right of way and given a hearty 'how are you'. I honestly don't see where the friction
stems from except maybe the fact that most equestrians I come across have an attitude worse than any
one else on the trails and are usually old folks with the notion we younger (or just fitter) and
more agile creatures irk them. There's plenty of room out there for everyone.

"BB" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
berlin.de...
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:29:05 -0600, MPD Blue wrote:
> >
> >
> > Penny S wrote:
> >> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have
a
> >> clue about trail ettiquette and set a poor example.
> >
> > Exactly, the point of my paper !-)
>
> Outlaw assholes.
>
> Sorry for my cynicism, but this is an old subject and if there were answers, they'd be pretty well
> known by now.
>
> Anyway, let's not forget the racer wannabes who think that multi-use singletrack is their personal
> raceway. That's the only real "conflict" I've seen in 8 years of riding. I'm just not sure anyone
> has come up with a way to deal with them, other than the well-deserved ass-whoopin. They're just
> as dangerous to other riders as they are to hikers - this is NOT hiker/biker conflict. Considering
> that bikers can't just jump aside like hikers can, these idiots are probably more dangerous to
> other riders than they are to hikers.
>
> There was one time a hiker stopped me to tell me I was on a trail that was off-limits to bikes.
> She was wrong about that, but I didn't know for sure (I was new to the area), so I turned back.
> Chalk up one to "perceived" conflict, though I'm not sure it was "conflict" since I did what
> she wanted.
>
> So two cases in some 500+ rides - less than 0.4% conflict (0.2% if you only count actual
> conflict).
>
> --
> -BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

I think I might start doing the 'civil disobediance' thing and start riding
where ever I want .

"dwtoo" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> There are all sorts, hikers, bikers, equestrians alike. I was hiking a section of the Pacific
> Crest Trail recently east of San Diego and was politely told by a group of equistrians that this
> trail was for horses
only,
> what gall! I've come across bikers while hiking on many a non-bike trail
and
> was always given right of way and given a hearty 'how are you'. I honestly don't see where
> the friction stems from except maybe the fact that most equestrians I come across have an
> attitude worse than any one else on the trails and are usually old folks with the notion we
> younger (or just
fitter)
> and more agile creatures irk them. There's plenty of room out there for everyone.
>
>
> "BB" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> berlin.de...
> > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:29:05 -0600, MPD Blue wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Penny S wrote:
> > >> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't
have
> a
> > >> clue about trail ettiquette and set a poor example.
> > >
> > > Exactly, the point of my paper !-)
> >
> > Outlaw assholes.
> >
> > Sorry for my cynicism, but this is an old subject and if there were answers, they'd be pretty
> > well known by now.
> >
> > Anyway, let's not forget the racer wannabes who think that multi-use singletrack is their
> > personal raceway. That's the only real "conflict" I've seen in 8 years of riding. I'm just not
> > sure anyone has come up
with
> > a way to deal with them, other than the well-deserved ass-whoopin.
They're
> > just as dangerous to other riders as they are to hikers - this is NOT hiker/biker conflict.
> > Considering that bikers can't just jump aside like hikers can, these idiots are probably more
> > dangerous to other riders
than
> > they are to hikers.
> >
> > There was one time a hiker stopped me to tell me I was on a trail that
was
> > off-limits to bikes. She was wrong about that, but I didn't know for
sure
> > (I was new to the area), so I turned back. Chalk up one to "perceived" conflict, though I'm not
> > sure it was "conflict" since I did what she wanted.
> >
> > So two cases in some 500+ rides - less than 0.4% conflict (0.2% if you only count actual
> > conflict).
> >
> > --
> > -BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

BB retorted :
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 20:01:47 -0500, Scott L Hadley wrote:
>
>> The equestrian/mtn bike friction and conflict on the carriage road system in Acadia National
>> Park, Maine, US.
>
> John (original poster), have you ever though about looking at these from the perspective of
> LOCATION? One thing that is (frustratingly) unique to my area is an almost complete lack of
> singletrack riding in and near town. The largest park only allows hiking on virtually all of the
> singletrack (there are many miles of multi-use fireroad). Conflict in this park is extremly rare,
> even though its VERY heavily used. Conflict on the trails several miles from town is pretty much
> unheard of, AFAIK.
>

good point Blaine! I know that around here, once you get out of the city proper there's miles and
miles of FS trail that's been used by horse packers and moto riders for years, and not much
wilderness area. So we can go pretty much wherever we want.

penny

 

On 2004-02-23, dwtoo penned:
> I think I might start doing the 'civil disobediance' thing and start riding where ever I want .

Please don't. I don't want to have mountain biking banned in my area just because you couldn't
follow the rules in yours.

--
monique

 

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:16:40 -0600, MPD Blue <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>I'm writing a term paper for one of my social sciences (Community Relations, to be exact) classes.
>I need to gather some real life examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived)
>between various types of trail users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic animals, native fauna,
>etc.) to illustrate the issues of users groups /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of
>conflict resolution would be especially useful.
>
>Of course, I'll post my paper when it's done, as well.

The most common thing that I have noticed are riders who don't yield even when you have the right of
way. They just hold their line and expect you to move. One guy tried to play chicken with me. I was
to the right on a woods road and he was to his left coming in the opposite direction. When I moved
to the left he moved with me. Going back to the right, he moved with me. I held my line making him
turn off at the last second. This was at a pretty moderate pace so it was more annoying than life
threatening.

Fredzep

 

On 22 Feb 2004 21:13:29 GMT, BB <[email protected]> wrote:

.On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:16:40 -0600, MPD Blue wrote: .> .> I'm writing a term paper for one of my
social sciences (Community .> Relations, to be exact) classes. I need to gather some real life .>
examples/stories of trail conflict (either real or perceived) between .> various types of trail
users (bikers, hikers equestrians, domestic .> animals, native fauna, etc.) to illustrate the issues
of users groups .> /compatibility and incompatibility. stories of conflict resolution would .> be
especially useful. . .I find LACK of conflict to be a far more common experience. But I guess
.there's no dramatic story in that.

Especially when it's a lie. Most hikers have been driven off of trails where bikes are allowed,
because it's dangerous and just no FUN being around large speeding pieces of machinery. If we wanted
to do that, we would walk on city streets! Most people also don't like conflict, and will avoid
those situations. Mountain bikers love to pretend that this means that there's no conflict.

Trail conflict caused a federal judge to decide that there is no right to mountain bike! See
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/mtb10.htm. That was in the home of mountain biking, Marin
County, CA.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

On 23 Feb 2004 01:06:46 GMT, BB <[email protected]> wrote:

.On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:29:05 -0600, MPD Blue wrote: .> .> .> Penny S wrote: .>> 4. Frustrated about
what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't have a .>> clue about trail ettiquette and set a poor
example. .> .> Exactly, the point of my paper !-) . .Outlaw assholes. . .Sorry for my cynicism, but
this is an old subject and if there were .answers, they'd be pretty well known by now. . .Anyway,
let's not forget the racer wannabes who think that multi-use .singletrack is their personal raceway.
That's the only real "conflict" .I've seen in 8 years of riding. I'm just not sure anyone has come
up with .a way to deal with them,

Right. Mountain bikers always claim that "education" will fix this problem, but it hasn't made a
dent in 20 years!

other than the well-deserved ass-whoopin. They're .just as dangerous to other riders as they are to
hikers - this is NOT .hiker/biker conflict.

Oh, sure. Hikers don't mind getting hit by racers. Right.

Considering that bikers can't just jump aside like .hikers can, these idiots are probably more
dangerous to other riders than .they are to hikers. . .There was one time a hiker stopped me to
tell me I was on a trail that was .off-limits to bikes. She was wrong about that, but I didn't know
for sure .(I was new to the area), so I turned back.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Since you weren't sure, you might as well have been
breaking the law.

Chalk up one to "perceived" .conflict, though I'm not sure it was "conflict" since I did what she
.wanted. . .So two cases in some 500+ rides - less than 0.4% conflict (0.2% if you .only count
actual conflict).

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:40:36 -0800, "dwtoo" <[email protected]> wrote:

.I think I might start doing the 'civil disobediance' thing and start riding .where ever I want .

That's not civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is doing it with full knowledge of the
authorities. That's just simple lawbreaking.

."dwtoo" <[email protected]> wrote in message .news:[email protected]... .> There are all
sorts, hikers, bikers, equestrians alike. I was hiking a .> section of the Pacific Crest Trail
recently east of San Diego and was .> politely told by a group of equistrians that this trail was
for horses .only, .> what gall! I've come across bikers while hiking on many a non-bike trail .and
.> was always given right of way and given a hearty 'how are you'. I honestly .> don't see where the
friction stems from except maybe the fact that most .> equestrians I come across have an attitude
worse than any one else on the .> trails and are usually old folks with the notion we younger (or
just .fitter) .> and more agile creatures irk them. There's plenty of room out there for .>
everyone. .> .> .> "BB" <[email protected]> wrote in message .> news:[email protected]
berlin.de... .> > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:29:05 -0600, MPD Blue wrote: .> > > .> > > .> > > Penny S
wrote: .> > >> 4. Frustrated about what to do about dewbies and newbies who don't .have .> a .> > >>
clue about trail ettiquette and set a poor example. .> > > .> > > Exactly, the point of my paper !-)
.> > .> > Outlaw assholes. .> > .> > Sorry for my cynicism, but this is an old subject and if there
were .> > answers, they'd be pretty well known by now. .> > .> > Anyway, let's not forget the racer
wannabes who think that multi-use .> > singletrack is their personal raceway. That's the only real
"conflict" .> > I've seen in 8 years of riding. I'm just not sure anyone has come up .with .> > a
way to deal with them, other than the well-deserved ass-whoopin. .They're .> > just as dangerous to
other riders as they are to hikers - this is NOT .> > hiker/biker conflict. Considering that bikers
can't just jump aside like .> > hikers can, these idiots are probably more dangerous to other riders
.than .> > they are to hikers. .> > .> > There was one time a hiker stopped me to tell me I was on a
trail that .was .> > off-limits to bikes. She was wrong about that, but I didn't know for .sure .> >
(I was new to the area), so I turned back. Chalk up one to "perceived" .> > conflict, though I'm not
sure it was "conflict" since I did what she .> > wanted. .> > .> > So two cases in some 500+ rides -
less than 0.4% conflict (0.2% if you .> > only count actual conflict). .> > .> > -- .> > -BB- .> >
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least) .> .> .

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande