Thread: Bad. Very bad.
View Single Post
Old 01-11-23, 04:51 PM
  #13  
Claude.fr
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Originally Posted by tungsten
Thompson says, that the cyclist is having twice the spatial impact in terms of potential wildlife disruption.

That’s a bit simplistic, to put it mildly and kindly.

French and other Europeans, Canadians, (surely Americans also ?) have been trying science instead of opinions i.e. MTB impact on fauna and flora and erosion and water, even.

French Alps, Valmorel Study started in 2017 for a five years period of observations, results should be published this year.

MBF - L'impact du VTT? Étude de Valmorel (73) | mbf-france

Preliminary results : no discernible negative impact but riding during the nesting season should be avoided.
At this stage, it’s a recommendation.

This one explicitly mentions US and Australian studies, but limited to Down Hill “circuits” impact.
Quelle surprise, excuse my french, (not) there are studies also, in the US, unsurprisingly.
How comes Thompson hasn’t done his homework ?

https://www.auvergne-rhone-alpes.dev..._cle274a13.pdf

Switzerland, Freiburg city official website.
https://www.fr.ch/sites/default/file...tiere-2021.pdf

Canada
“However, there is no evidence that mountain bikers cause greater environmental impact than other trail users. The current research suggests that mountain biking impacts are similar to hiking, and less damaging than equestrian and motorized users.”

https://imbacanada.com/trail-science/
Claude.fr is offline