The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Amphibians and
Reptiles
Michael J. Vandeman, Ph.D.
October 22, 2005
"Cities should be built on one side of the
street." Bob Kaufman, 1959, p.60
"Mountain bikes' impacts on
the land are large and getting worse. … The aggressive push of mountain bike
organizations to build ever-growing webs of trails poses serious problems of
habitat fragmentation, increased erosion, and wildlife conflicts. As interest
in extreme riding continues to grow, as trail networks burgeon, and as new
technology makes it possible for ever-more mountain bicyclists to participate,
even the most remote wild landscapes may become trammeled -- and trampled -- by
knobby tires. … The destruction of wilderness and the fragmentation of habitats
and ecosystems is death by a thousand cuts. Will introduction of mountain bikes
-- and their penetration farther into wilderness -- promote additional
fragmentation and human conflicts with the natural world? Yes." O'Donnell
and Carroll, 2003.
"Some things are obvious: mountain
bikes do more damage to the land than hikers. To think otherwise ignores the
story told by the ground." Dave Foreman, 2003
The
sport of mountain biking is expanding rapidly, fueled partly by the mountain
bike and tourism industries, the Olympics, and other competitive events (e.g.,
"adventure racing"). ("Trail use in
the last ten years has seen a dramatic increase in off-road bicycles"
(Wilson and Seney, 1994, p.86). "Mountain biking in particular is one of
the fastest-growing outdoor activities, with 43.3 million persons participating
at least once in 2000" (Taylor and Knight, 1993, p.952). "An
estimated 13.5 million mountain bicyclists visit public lands each year"
(U.S. Bureau of Land Management)(Lathrop, 2003).) It is putting intense
pressure on wildlife habitat, worldwide, as well as inhibiting efforts to
protect additional lands. There is strong pressure to
find places to ride that are convenient -- not too far from home or work. This
brings bikers in direct conflict with other urban and near-urban
recreationists, who want to use the same parks.
Most of the studies on mountain
biking impacts attempt to compare hiking and mountain biking, and conclude that
their impacts are essentially the same. However, they all ignore speed and
distance travelled, and nearly all ignore impacts on wildlife; they also make
no attempt to test mountain biking under realistic conditions (e.g. normal
speeds). A more accurate conclusion from the data presented would be that the
impacts of mountain biking are actually from two to six times those of hiking,
due in part to the greater speed and distance travelled by mountain bikers. No published statistics are available, but I collected 72
mountain bikers' ride announcements, which advertise one-day rides of a minimum
of 8 miles, an average of 27 miles, and a maximum of 112 miles -- much greater
distances than hikers travel. (Vandeman, 2004). "Because bicyclists are capable of and, in most areas,
typically do travel much farther than hikers, it is reasonable to conclude that
they will create a somewhat higher total number of encounters [with animals]
and flushings" (Lathrop, 2003).
Some
of the other important characteristics of mountain biking that have been
ignored are: the direct killing of small animals, the increase in number of
visitors that bikes allow; increased trail-building, with its attendant habitat
destruction; the displacement of soil (other than downhill); the killing of
roots and soil organisms; most effects on wildlife; the manner of riding
(skidding, braking, acceleration, turning, and whether the mountain biking
tested is representative of typical mountain biking); tire tread; and noise.
Braking,
accelerating, and turning all create horizontal forces that accelerate erosion.
Whereas shoes tend to flatten trails, bike tires create V-shaped ruts (Chiu and Kriwoken, 2003), which channel water and
further increase erosion (as well as making the trails difficult and dangerous
to walk on). Bikes also throw dirt to the outside on
turns, crush small plants and animals on and under the trail, facilitate
increased levels of human access into wildlife habitat, and drive other trail
users (many of whom are seeking the tranquility and primitiveness of natural
surroundings) out of the parks.
Amphibians and reptiles that lay their eggs in the soft dirt next to the trail (e.g. fence lizards and turtles -- Gary Beeman, personal communication) or in creeks (e.g. California newts), sun themselves in the trail (e.g. fence and alligator lizards and rattlesnakes), or migrate across trails (e.g. California newts), can be expected to incur an increase in mortality wherever mountain bikes are ridden. "Mountain bikes are a significant threat to turtles as the heavily used trails can act as death traps, tempting nesting females to lay their eggs in the eroded soils in high-traffic areas. … A newly emerged hatchling was found … on a mountain bike trail" (SaintOurs, 2000). The killing of plants on and next to the trail can deprive amphibians and reptiles of food (for example, box turtles eat berries -- SaintOurs, 2000).
Besides
increasing the presence of humans in wildlife habitat (Vandeman, 1997), mountain biking causes direct mortality and morbidity of
small animals and plants ("Anecdotal evidence suggests … that small
mammals are vulnerable to impact and are not uncommonly killed" --
Lathrop, 2003). Even on foot, it is hard to avoid stepping on a
well-camouflaged
In
Black Diamond Mines Regional Preserve (in the San Francisco Bay Area), one of
the largest
Recently
there has been a large increase in night riding. This has the potential to
further increase threats to amphibians and reptiles, if the animals are on or
near a trail. If mountain bikers can't avoid crushing snakes on a wide trail in
broad daylight, I hate to think what they will do at night! Amphibians that
could be most impacted by night riding include those that migrate across trails
at night (e.g.
Another
disturbing trend is the increasing popularity of "freeriding": riding
on trails doesn't provide enough challenge or enough thrills, so bikers are
riding off-trail. This can only increase the threat to wildlife. Finally,
Wisdom et al (2004) found that elk's avoidance of an area extended beyond
the period when recreationists were actually present. When mountain bikers
came within 1,640 yards, elk responded by fleeing the area. If a similar effect
holds for amphibians and reptiles, I would expect a significant loss of
(usable) habitat and increased energy costs due to wide-ranging mountain
bikers.
It is
clear that the addition of bicycles to natural areas is a serious threat to
amphibians and reptiles, especially in the heavily populated urban environment.
Literature Cited
Chiu, L. and L. Kriwoken.
2003. Managing Recreational Mountain Biking in
Foreman,
D. 2003. A modest proposal. Wild Earth 13(1):34-5.
Kaufman,
Bob. 1959. Solitudes Crowded with Loneliness. New Directions Publishing
Corporation,
Lathrop,
J. 2003. Ecological impacts of mountain biking: a critical literature review. http://www.wildlandscpr.org/resourcelibrary/reports/mountainbikingreport.htm.
O'Donnell,
B. and M. Carroll. 2003. Don't tread here. Wild Earth 13(1):31-33.
SaintOurs,
F. H. 2000. Turtle conservation in rapidly developing suburban areas: An
example from
Stebbins,
R. C. and N. W. Cohen. 1995. A Natural History of Amphibians.
Taylor, A.
and R. L. Knight. 2003. Wildlife responses to recreation and associated visitor
perceptions. Ecological Applications 13(4):951-63.
Vandeman,
M. J. 1997. Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans! Presented at the
Society for Conservation Biology meeting,
-----
2004. The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the
Literature. Presented at the Society for Conservation Biology meeting,
Wilson, J.
P. and J. Seney. 1994. Erosional impact of hikers, horses, motorcycles, and
off-road bicycles on mountain trails in
Wisdom, M.
J., A. A. Ager, H. K. Preisler, N. J. Cimon, and B. K. Johnson. 2004. Effects
of off-road recreation on mule deer and elk. Transactions of the North American
Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 69, pp. 531-550.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Ringneck snake, apparently killed by a mountain biker. Photo: Christopher
Conroy,