Bikes cause erosion???

Arwen's Mom

Mother of Dragons, Breaker of Chains
Had a conversation today with someone who went through forestry training and some other environmental type classes (cant remember exactly) but he said that bikes should be outlawed from trails because they cause erosion. He said the Environmental Protection Agency has loads of data proving that the tires from bikes cause erosion and wash outs and ruin trails. He said they even tried to get Vibrams shoes banned because the tread grips so well it tears up the dirt.

He cant be serious. Can he?

Anyway, I know he feels that bikes really do cause damage. I told him that bikes dont cause damage when trails are built and maintained correctly.
So, what info can I show him, share with him to prove his ideas are incorrect? I figure you guys could help point me in the right direction.
 
https://www.imba.com/resources/rese...tain-biking-science-review-and-best-practices

Excerpt citing studies:

Several studies have evaluated the soil impacts of mountain biking.

Wilson and Seney (1994) evaluated tread erosion from horses, hikers, mountain bikes, and motorcycles on two trails in the Gallatin National Forest, Montana. They applied one hundred passes of each use-type on four sets of 12 trail segments, followed by simulated rainfalls and collection of water runoff to assess sediment yield at the base of each segment. Control sites that received no passes were also assessed for comparison. Results indicated that horses made significantly more sediment available for erosion than the other uses, which did not significantly vary from the control sites. Traffic on pre-wetted soils generated significantly greater amounts of soil runoff than on dry soils for all uses.

Marion (2006) studied 78 miles (125 km) of trail (47 segments) in the Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area, Tennessee and Kentucky, measuring soil loss along transects across the trail to evaluate the influence of use-related, environmental, and management factors. Sidehill-aligned trails were significantly less eroded than trails in valley bottom positions, in part due to the influence of periodic floods. Trail grade and trail alignment angle were also significant predictors of tread erosion. Erosion rates on trails with 0-6 percent and 7-15 percent grades were similar, while erosion on trails with grades greater than 16 percent were significantly higher. And there was significantly greater erosion on fall line trails (alignment angles of 0-22 degrees) than those with alignments closer to the contour.

This study also provided an opportunity to examine the relative contribution of different use types, including horse, hiking, mountain biking, and ATV. Trails predominantly used for mountain biking had the least erosion of the use types investigated. Computed estimates of soil loss per mile of trail also revealed the mountain biking trails to have the lowest soil loss.

White and others (2006) also examined trails predominantly used for mountain biking in five ecological regions of the Southwest along 163 miles (262 km) of trail. Two trail condition indicators, tread width and maximum incision, were assessed at each sample point. Results show that erosion and tread width on these trails differed little in comparison to other shared-use trails that receive little or no mountain biking.

Goeft and Alder (2001) evaluated the resource impacts of mountain biking on a recreational trail and racing track in Australia over a 12-month period. A variety of trail condition indicators were assessed on new and older trail segments with uphill, downhill, and flat trail sections. Results found that trail slope, age, and time were significant erosion factors, and that downhill slopes and curves were the most susceptible to erosion. New trails experienced greater amounts of soil compaction but all trails exhibited both compaction and loosening of soils over time. The width of the recreational trail varied over time, with no consistent trend, while the width of the racing trail grew following events but exhibited net recovery over time. Impacts were confined to the trail tread, with minimal disturbance of trailside vegetation.

Bjorkman (1996) evaluated two new mountain biking trails in Wisconsin before and for several years after they were opened to use. Vegetation cover within the tread that survived trail construction work declined with increasing use to negligible levels while trailside vegetation remained constant or increased in areas damaged by construction work. Similarly, soil compaction within the tread rose steadily while compaction of trailside soils remained constant. Vegetation and soil impacts occurred predominantly during the first year of use with minor changes thereafter.

Wohrstein (1998) evaluated the impacts from a World Championship mountain biking race with 870 participants and 80,000 spectators. Erosion was found only on intensively used racing trails in steep terrain where alignments allowed higher water runoff. The mountain biking routes exhibited higher levels of compaction but to a shallower depth in comparison to the spectator areas, where compaction was lower but deeper.

Cessford (1995) provides a comprehensive, though dated, summary of trail impacts with a focus on mountain biking. Of particular interest is his summary of the two types of forces exerted by bike tires on soil surfaces: The downward compaction force from the weight of the rider and bike, and the rotational shearing force from the turning rear wheel. Mountain bikers generate the greatest torque, with potential tread abrasion due to slippage, during uphill travel. However, the torque possible from muscle power is far less than that from a motorcycle, so wheel slippage and abrasion occur only on wet or loose surfaces. Tread impact associated with downhill travel is generally minimal due to the lack of torque and lower ground pressures. Exceptions include when riders brake hard enough to cause skidding, which displaces soil downslope, or bank at higher speeds around turns, which displaces soil to the outside of the turn. Impacts in flatter terrain are also generally minimal, except when soils are wet or uncompacted and rutting occurs.
 
Bit more in depth on some pertinent results Ken included from the IMBA site.

Assessing and Understanding Trail Degradation: Results from Big South Fork National River and Recreational Area

by: Jeffrey L. Marion Principal Investigator


"Soil loss on horse trails was estimated at 5,395 ft3/mi, approximately eight times more than occurs on hiker trails (669 ft3/mi). In contrast, mountain biking, at 202 ft3/mi, has the lowest estimated level of soil loss, about 30% as much as on hiking trails. This finding reflects a limited mileage of trails where mountain biking was the predominant use (1.91 mi), and these trails received low to moderate levels of use. As a percentage of aggregate erosion, erosion from horse trails (50.5%) accounts for the majority of soil loss. Mixed use trails, for which the predominant use is horse riding, account for 35.5% of aggregate soil loss, followed by ATV’s (8.0%), hikers (5.9%) and mountain bikes (0.1%). These data are not presented to apportion blame to specific use types, rather to emphasize that managers seeking to accommodate horse and ATV uses should acknowledge their higher potential for eroding soil and incorporate improved trail design, construction, maintenance and visitor use management practices to ensure that such uses are sustainable."

Also of note is that when divided by category MTB trails were the narrowest (less surface area), followed by hiking, horse, and then atv/orv.
 
In reality, any trail use causes some type of erosion. People can also point out deer crossing over the same trail can cause erosion. It's all about maintaining trails and diverting rainfall.Maybe this person from the EPA would like us humans to all live in a bubble.
 
How old was this person?
Scary to think they might still teach this type of philosophy, though I suspect they do. ....... refer to Lewis Morris thread. .
 
I'd love to see a link to that EPA data. Strangely, as hard as I tried I could not find any EPA produced studies proving bikes cause more damage than foot travel. Maybe I just don't have the search skills, but I spent a fair amount of time on the EPA website as well as all of the web. I repeatedly found studies concluding that bike impact was similar to hiking impact.
 
Had a conversation today with someone who went through forestry training and some other environmental type classes (cant remember exactly) but he said that bikes should be outlawed from trails because they cause erosion. He said the Environmental Protection Agency has loads of data proving that the tires from bikes cause erosion and wash outs and ruin trails. He said they even tried to get Vibrams shoes banned because the tread grips so well it tears up the dirt.

He cant be serious. Can he?

Anyway, I know he feels that bikes really do cause damage. I told him that bikes dont cause damage when trails are built and maintained correctly.
So, what info can I show him, share with him to prove his ideas are incorrect? I figure you guys could help point me in the right direction.
Rain causes erosion. Also see entropy.
 
I think damage and erosion are different things. Yes, bikes cause damage but so does everything else. I think it is easy to point to trail widing when you see bike track around puddles and stuff. Or a bike that makes it own trail, you could walk and not disturb too much but rogue riding is easier to detect.

In any case, the demonstration of trail maintenance by people
Like JORBA far out weighs the erosion arguments.
 
Last edited:
watch for studies that are not controlled - and dismiss them. various length trails, various use levels, no closed trail as a control.
----
i also think it is different in NJ from allaire->north than other places with sprawling parks - we have relatively small trail systems with lots of traffic in areas surrounded by people. when a problem develops, we fix it. the only real care we have is if it was bad design. Some great trails are being developed to eliminate the eroding fall-line stuff.
 
So what I see as the main reason the erosion happens by bikes is what has already been said about riding when the trails are wet or soft.
Going around soft or wet spots and making the trails wider, Also and I see this first hand is locking the rear brake and causing a "divot".
There are perfect examples of the type of damage that this causes mostly at the top of a switchback type trail that has a runoff problem as soon as there is any type of small rut the water now can gather speed and dirt and carry it downhill.
I feel that all the trail users cause some sort of erosion but groups like JORBA have worked in their local parks and know first hand what techniques work to minimize the damage done by use.
 
Back
Top Bottom