HUGE NEWS: BC Parks Partnership Agreement for Gowlland Tod Signed


I’m very happy to announce to you that…

Last weekend I signed the Partnership Agreement between SIMBS and BC Parks to investigate possible future mountain bike designation to selected trails in Gowlland Tod Provincial Park. The initial area that will be looked at is Partridge Hills (including the surrounding area). This will involve a comprehensive trail assessment of the present inventory that will take place during the 2014/15 period. At the conclusion of this initial assessment we will review the data with BC Parks and seek approval to begin construction, where appropriate, of a consistent and sustainable multi-use trail network. As we enter into this project, BC Parks has asked me to remind our membership that relatively few trails in the Gowlland Tod system at the present time are approved for mountain bike use. Information on approved trails can be found at the BC Parks website, park information shelters and the CRD Mt. Work trailhead.

Following the evaluation of Partridge Hills area trails, SIMBS has the option to undertake similar inventory/assessment projects in other defined areas of the park under the same terms and conditions.

This is the first formal agreement SIMBS has had with BC Parks. We are looking forward to working closely with them throughout this process.

This will be a large project that will need a dedicated volunteer base to make it happen. If you are interested in being part of this process, please let me know at

Daniel Cammiade
SIMBS President

7 Replies to "HUGE NEWS: BC Parks Partnership Agreement for Gowlland Tod Signed"

  • comment-avatar
    April 26, 2014 (8:39 am)

    More mountain biking for everyone !!!

  • comment-avatar
    April 27, 2014 (9:37 am)

    As a frequent hiker in these areas I am completely AGAINST expanding the mountain biking trails. Just take a hike through there now where they aren’t currently permitted and you will see ruts in the mud, moss torn off rocks, and delicate wildflowers obliterated. I know that some bikers are more respectful of the environment but the nature of the sport is inherently damaging, far more than hiking is. This is really bad news for hikers and the environment. Requiring a name and then accepting something like THEONE as in the previous comment is not right.

  • comment-avatar
    Graham Powell
    April 27, 2014 (5:22 pm)

    Hi Joan, Keep in mind I’m not here to argue with you, but I wish to keep an open dialogue between everyone.

    As a frequent hiker as well as biker, I can say that I see more damage around hiking only trails, especially in the Mt. Work. area. On some trails sections are now 6-7 feet wide, and in muddy areas even wider. You don’t see that type of trail widening on mountain biking trails near as much. That statement is just from personal experience, and one can argue it’s my opinion. However, there has also been a number of studies and environmental impact surveys that have shown that at the very least mountain bikers have no additional impact than hikers, and some have concluded that hikers have even more impact (although this could be due to the fact there are FAR more casual hikers than bikers).

    Sorry, but mountain biking is not any more inherently damaging then hiking. Moss torn of rock, and wildflowers obliterated can be done by any user group. In personal observation (again using Mt. Work as my example) I have seen this happen more on the hiking trails than biking.

    The reality is, that a bad user in ANY discipline can have a negative impact, and the user is to blame, not the discipline itself.


  • comment-avatar
    May 1, 2014 (12:45 pm)

    Every user group has an impact. With unmanaged access there always going to be more impact than in a managed environment. Trail building, planning, maintenance and trail stewardship is better than no legal access and no maintenance, planning or proper trail building (or improper trail closing).

    A good read.

    Facts are important, hearsay is well, just that.

  • comment-avatar
    Graham Powell
    May 1, 2014 (12:54 pm)

    Well said Greg.

    I didn’t link to that article in my response, as it can look like Mountain Biker bias coming from the IMBA site. Something I’m trying avoid. That said, almost everything in that article came from peer-reviewed scientific journals, which I’m currently trying get my hands on, with permission to publish excepts on this site.

  • comment-avatar
    Fergus Mooney
    May 5, 2014 (6:04 am)

    I’m all for SIMBS in this area but like it or not these are multiuse trails and regardless will remain multiuse trails.

  • comment-avatar
    May 27, 2014 (12:30 pm)

    Unfortunately, the photos that you have posted are in a location that is private land and is NOT the area that is in parkland – which is in essence trespassing.
    While I’m excited to have mountain bike access within the BC Park by Partridge HIlls, the damage that is being done to the area by individuals riding mountain bikes (in a Slegg Lumber truck and others) by cutting down trees, constructing large jumps and obstacles, etc for a few seconds of video – is giving mountain bikers a bad name in the area.

Got something to say?

Some html is OK