Touring - Are we hurting bicycle touring in the process?

I've recently read a few articles on making a national route system for the US simular to what they have in Europe. My question is, Are we ultimatly killing the reason why touring is so popular? If our routes become like the interstate, will we just become another car on the road? Will the adventure be gone when you know thousands have already done what you're in the process of doing? Will the little towns along the way become so jaded to the traveling bicyclist that everything becomes a comodity to them when seen as a regular meal ticket? Are we risking the prepackaging of our sport and taking all of the adventure out of it?

Just curious to know what others think.

I think you should do some touring in Europe someday.

Wait, what? Please point me towards this "national" (international) network of bike route that we have over here. I know of the danube trail and maybe two others.

What we do have here in france is an insane network of small country farm roads that you can follow to your heart's desire. Sure, there are some greenways, and they are nice too, and you will see other cyclists, but is that a problem?

As a side note, I went from france to holland along the meuse river greenway (Ravel) and only saw two or three other cyclists in 100 miles.

And maybe metzinger can tell you a little about the amazing system the have in the netherlands. In fact that is a real bike route network!

In short, I would answer no to all of your questions.

Can't see it as a problem (or benefit ?) in our lifetime and there's nothing that says you won't be allowed off the beaten path.

Wait, what? Please point me towards this "national" (international) network of bike route that we have over here. I know of the danube trail and maybe two others.

What we do have here in france is an insane network of small country farm roads that you can follow to your heart's desire. Sure, there are some greenways, and they are nice too, and you will see other cyclists, but is that a problem?

As a side note, I went from france to holland along the meuse river greenway (Ravel) and only saw two or three other cyclists in 100 miles.

And maybe metzinger can tell you a little about the amazing system the have in the netherlands. In fact that is a real bike route network!

In short, I would answer no to all of your questions.

The Adventure Cycling Assoc. along with many individual states are working towards this end as we speak (type). I'm speaking primarily of the US.

Yes, I know, have you actually ridden on one of the ACA routes yet? The only thing that makes it a bike route is the fact that they publish maps with directions facilities on them. The only thing that takes the adventure away is knowing that there will be a cafe, camping, or whatever up ahead. They help to take the planning out of touring, which sometimes is a very fun part of it. Although if you just want to pick a route and go you can, and it will still be an amazing adventure.

Anyway, I was asking for some info on this bike route network that we have in Europe. Some countries are better than others, for example belgium and holland, but there is no, that i know of, international bike network here. As I said I know of maybe 3 routes that are international.

For me, I like to take a highlighter and outline a route taking small country lanes that will have hardly any traffic on them.

I was at a recent ACA gathering and we were shown a map of specific bicycle touring routes that go all throughout Europe.
Other than that, I have no first hand info.

I would like to get my hands on that map then! In my map collection I have half of the belgium map, and for the flemish region the routes are quite extensive. They are still wild, and it is nothing like a bike interstate. In holland you can pick a destination and follow a series of signs designated by number to get you there.

Whatever the case, you can never kill the adventure of bike touring. And if you do not want to follow an established route then you don't have to, just do the planning and make it your own.

Also, from my experience the little towns along the ACA transam route loved cyclists. Twin bridges MT even built a bike camp especially for bike tourers with great facilities and only ask for a donation! What a great thing! I loved meeting the other bike tourers there, it did not make me feel like it was less of an adventure because others were doing it, it made me feel like part of an elite club :thumb:

As now, with boats and buses touring modes, you can take a prepackaged bike tour on a 'safe', established route or you can 'roll your own' bike tour, to coin a phrase. Something for everyone, according to their tolerance of risk.

Here's a zoomable map of the national bike routes (landelijke fietsroutes) in Belgium and Holland.
No place name labels on this one, so one needs to cross-ref landmarks with a GoogleMaps page.
http://openfietskaart.nl/
Green lines are main routes, blue are a signposted intersection network (knooppunt network).
Short sections of some of these become busy mid-day on the nicest weekends of summer, but only ones near major centers.
The Netherlands is the most densely populated country in Europe, with the highest number of cyclists per capita.

Not one route feels like an Interstate. Ever.

I've toured on a few of Adventure Cycling's more popular route segments. I find just the opposite is true. I enjoy meeting the occasional other bike tourer along the way. The small towns that have experience with bike tourists seem to relish the business and are better equipped to offer things a bike tourist needs.

Cars get used to seeing bikes on popular routes. That improves safety.

The more bike tourists, the merrier. There's plenty of room in the pool for everyone.

There is the North Sea Cycle Route, which traverses the countries that border the North Sea. http://www.northsea-cycle.com/default.asp

I rode part of it during my tour in The Netherlands and Belgium last September. I'm not sure to what extent the route has been signed or developed in the other countries along the route.

As for the original question, we can only HOPE that bicycle touring would become so popular in the USA that it would seem mundane.

So, let me get this straight. Making routes more accessible to bike tourists is somehow bad for touring...?

If you want to take the road less cycled, nothing's stopping you from grabbing a map and riding. Popularizing and standardizing routes will make it easier for people to tour, and is far more likely to increase the number of bicycle tourists than to negatively impact it.

Nope.

The world is so huge, the people who want to map their own route and follow their own trail will go find it. The people who just want to tour to go sightseeing will take the roads.

FWIW Department-- We tend to stay off the ACA routes for all of the above reasons. On our trip across the US we saw only 6 other x-country cyclists in 3650 miles, except were our route intersected with ACA routes. I think the locals were more willing to engage, and we were shown hospitality that I have not seen on the one ACA route I've actually ridden (I've been on the same route twice. The last time so my wife could do it). So my comment is based on a sample of one!

I don't think it matters where we ride or what we ride. The important thing is that we are there doing it, and the world is big enough to allow us to do it our own way. The one thing that I really like is when the ice cream shops are well spaced:)

I think you should do some touring in Europe someday.

+1

And other countries. People don't just tour in the US. People tour all over the world. If the US wants more specific bicycle routes, that's just one country in the world. There are lots of other countries to tour that don't have specific bicycle routes.

Plus no one is forcing people who want to tour the US to follow the ACA routes. If I wanted to cycle across the US, I wouldn't follow a predesignated route, I'd make my own route and go where I want to go.

And speaking as someone who has toured in Europe, I've yet to see any extensive mapping systems for bicycle routes. Various areas have bicycle maps (i.e. England has a general bicycle network map, and the Ieper area has a set of maps) , but if there area more extensive ones, I'd like to see them!! I've even asked in tourist places there to see if there is such a thing, and they have not been able to help me either.

Hi,

yes of course: In the 80's you could tour in Europe and see 1 other bike-tourist per week. In the 90's you met 1 bike tourist in countries like Morocco, Ecuador, Zimbabwe per month.
nowadays it's getting crowdy.... but where is the problem? (Okay nowadays no one offers me a bed for a night in Germany, that was 20 years ago, quite often the case)

But if you choose non-flat-mountain-off-road-routes in remote areas there is still a bit of adventure. And nobody forces you to follow the proposed routes - and there you'll find the hospitality you known.

Thomas

And speaking as someone who has toured in Europe, I've yet to see any extensive mapping systems for bicycle routes. Various areas have bicycle maps (i.e. England has a general bicycle network map, and the Ieper area has a set of maps) , but if there area more extensive ones, I'd like to see them!! I've even asked in tourist places there to see if there is such a thing, and they have not been able to help me either.

Really? Go into any bike shop in Germany, and the first thing you'll see are bike maps. Denmark and Sweden. Holland. Belgium. All good. France a little less. Maybe not so much Spain and Italy.

As for the OP, it all depends on your goals. If you want adventure, it's not hard to find.

Really? Go into any bike shop in Germany, and the first thing you'll see are bike maps. Denmark and Sweden. Holland. Belgium. All good. France a little less. Maybe not so much Spain and Italy.

As for the OP, it all depends on your goals. If you want adventure, it's not hard to find.

The main place I checked was Strasbourg, but I think I also checked in Paris. I wanted a map for the Rhine Route, and also for all the bicycle paths in the city. And anything else they could give me. I came away with nothing.

In Belgium, I got the fietsroutes maps, of course.

The main place I checked was Strasbourg, but I think I also checked in Paris. I wanted a map for the Rhine Route, and also for all the bicycle paths in the city. And anything else they could give me. I came away with nothing.

In Belgium, I got the fietsroutes maps, of course.

Out of curiosity, did you look in bike shops or tourist offices? Thinking back, there were much better maps in bike shops in Germany than in the tourist offices. Seems to be the other way around in Denmark.

Out of curiosity, did you look in bike shops or tourist offices? Thinking back, there were much better maps in bike shops in Germany than in the tourist offices. Seems to be the other way around in Denmark.

Tourist offices. And it seems to me that the Strasbourg office did usually have a bicycle map of some sort, but they were out of it ... or something like that.

I've recently read a few articles on making a national route system for the US simular to what they have in Europe. My question is, Are we ultimatly killing the reason why touring is so popular? If our routes become like the interstate, will we just become another car on the road? Will the adventure be gone when you know thousands have already done what you're in the process of doing? Will the little towns along the way become so jaded to the traveling bicyclist that everything becomes a comodity to them when seen as a regular meal ticket? Are we risking the prepackaging of our sport and taking all of the adventure out of it?

Just curious to know what others think.

I think your concern is unfounded. A few points:

The routes are just lines on maps connecting interesting points on existing rideable roads. It isn't like they consist of any special bike lanes or bike paths.
The fact that there are lines on the maps called bike routes doesn't mean they are heavily used by cyclists.
On perhaps one of the most popular bicycle routes, the Trans America we often met folks in small towns who had no idea the route went through their town and who had no idea what we were doing. In other situations where they were really used to seeing cyclists they were not jaded and didn't think of us as a commodity or meal ticket.
Nothing prevents bike tourists from seeking out other roads if they prefer mot to ride on bike routes.

... it did not make me feel like it was less of an adventure because others were doing it, it made me feel like part of an elite club :thumb:

I like this quote a lot.

I think the western world in general has become quite lazy and there is never going to be an abundence of cycle tourists hitting the roads. There are too many towns; too many roads and different routes to take.

These maps are just road maps showing various routes that someone can take on foot, on bicycle etc. They aren't set in stone or dedicated, thousands of kilometres long paved trails - which would never be economically viable; and could you really see governments in various countries agreeing to fund such a path? They are usually just theoretical coloured lines on a map, placed upon upon existing roads. Besides, once a route (or tourist attraction) became over-popular, riders have, and always will find new routes.

As for the general public becoming jaded with cyclists, I also disagree. Bicycle tourers are usually not a disruptive, undesirable element. Dedicated, motivated, goal-oriented people like bicycle tourists are generally responsible and hard working persons, not trouble makers.

I think the fear is unfounded.

Nope... don't agree with just about everything you mention OP. If you have been touring before and I assume you have. Even on the routes the ACA puts out I would go days without seeing another cyclist. We are few.

I've recently read a few articles on making a national route system for the US simular to what they have in Europe. My question is, Are we ultimatly killing the reason why touring is so popular? If our routes become like the interstate, will we just become another car on the road? Will the adventure be gone when you know thousands have already done what you're in the process of doing? Will the little towns along the way become so jaded to the traveling bicyclist that everything becomes a comodity to them when seen as a regular meal ticket? Are we risking the prepackaging of our sport and taking all of the adventure out of it?

Just curious to know what others think.

The transamerica trail in the 1970s (and for many years thereafter) hosted thousands of cross country cyclists from Astoria Oregon to Virginia. I think it left nothing but incredible goodwill along the way.

Many touring cyclists are more sophisticated these days and take their own routes...helped by many bikeforums users, for example.

roughstuff

I was sitting in bed reading the touring forum late last night when I saw this thread. I will have another crack at adding some more thoughts now. My comments may be a little abstract and off-topic, but please bear with me.

As an Australian I sometimes think about 1788 when Sydney was established and feel a little nostalgic. Not at the founding of this nation, but that the last great unknown for travel had become, well, known. The map was virtually complete. Nothing major left to discover. Most of the blanks had been filled-in. Everest was conquered (1952?) -- the last frontier. So it's now 1953... mountain climbers can hang up their boots forever, right...

Today there are 6 billion + people on earth, technology is improving all the time at an incredible rate, yet new plants, fish etc. are discovered every year that nobody had ever seen before.

Man will always find new horizons (DNA, space travel etc.). The more advanced the world gets, with satellite maps and GPS technology available --only a few years ago to secret government agencies -- available to all, the less people want to actually use the knowledge. The busier the world gets, the less time people have for travelling. A person predisposed to/inclined to bicycle tour today is someone with the same personality type of someone who would have undertaken an adventure hundreds of years ago. On a per-person basis, there are probably less tourers/adventure travellers today than in the 1800s or 1900s. No amount of coloured lines on maps will encourage couch potatos to begin a bicycle tour!

Set foot outside your fancy hotel in many parts of the world -- Africa, Asia, South America etc. Go to rural China an hour outside Shanghai's Central Business District, or elsewhere in Asia, and begin a bicycle tour. Tourers everywhere, right? Nobody staring at you or talking about you with bemused looks on their faces when you stop to buy a drink in a local store? Of course not! It's 2010 and we've grown up with technology and access to forums like this; information at our fingertips. But for much of the today's world, a bicycle tourer is a novelty they are unlikely to see again for many years -- if at all.

Until I become interested in touring a few years ago, I had never heard of it. I had no idea someone could travel long distances and camp overnight, then move-on the next morning. But like most things, once you're aware of its existence, you see them everywhere and it seems common. I bought a classic 1965 car a couple of years after seeing it advertised very cheap, and in poor condition outside my local pub. I never used to see classic cars on the road. After restoring the car, looking for parts online, having people ask about it etc. I was seeing classic cars everywhere!

I can see where the OP is coming from and have wondered about this myself, but the world is too big, too diverse, too complicated for touring to lose its dimension of excitement. A similar argument applies to popularised theories of globalisation, a topic on which I have been (unfortunately) writing a lot of papers lately.

The world won't run out of adventures. In fact, tongue firmly in cheek, I would argue that non-tourers out there should feel grateful to bicycle tourers for keeping the knowledge base/ lost art of adventure travel alive and preserving it for future generations :)

I agree that touring and following an established route is defeating the purpose. However, I don't feel that these concerns are justified.

A touring route through a small town would have the same effect that our National Scenic Trails such as the Appalachian trail and Pacfic Crest trail do on rural America. These obscure routes bring an interesting and diverse crowd (and business) to a town otherwise untouched by tourists.

Making this national route is just the next step in getting the average American into a sport. It is a comparable step to bicycle manufacturers making complete, low end touring packages. By sacrificing some uniquness and individuality, you are likely to appeal to a wider audience with simplicity and affordability.

If you don't like it you are still free to choose your own adventure.

I can't see how following an established route is defeating the purpose. I thought the purpose was to get out on your bike, under your own steam and see the country you are in at the moment.

I've never followed an established route end to end but have used sections because it suited me. Would I feel cheated if I did follow the route end to end? No

We're heading to Switzerland in June and will probably be using some of their routes. They have 9 national routes and 55 regional routes. There is great information at http://veloland.myswitzerland.com/en/routen.cfm

I'll probably end up using a bit of this and a bit of that. I'll have plan A, plan B and probably ride plan C - according to how I feel, the weather, my partner and just what seems good at the time.

I've never followed an established route end to end but have used sections because it suited me. Would I feel cheated if I did follow the route end to end? No



This is what my partner and I did in Europe last year. Did our own route in Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg, following bike paths on only two occasions for a short time when they went in the same direction as we wanted to go.

Then followed the bike paths along the Mosel, Rhine, Neckar, Black Forest, Danube,
Romantic Strasse, Isar, Konigsee-Bodensee for as long as we wished before taking other routes between. Then followed the Inns bike path when we could locate it, Route 9 in Switzerland and just did our own thing in France. At times, we detoured onto easier roads to avoid steep gravel sections as we encountered on Route 9.

We met lots of cyclists on some routes in Germany, only a few in other countries. We used the cycle routes only when they followed the direction we were heading in, not simply to follow a route from one end to another.

Maps were obtained from tourist offices and book shops when we were following a route for a few days. I never thought of the routes as a 'National Route' but more as part of a cycling network which they are.

Having taken quite a few tourism courses in university I would love to see more cycle-tourists out there. There are seemingly endless problems associated with mass-tourism, and cycle-tourism has been shown to be one of the better tourism markets - typically lower impact, less leakages and a higher number of responsible, returning tourists.

I have yet to follow an ACA route, but did use Peddlers Paradise when touring around New Zealand. I used their routes because it made it easier for me and I wanted to meet other cyclists. I ended up meeting 2 in the 6 weeks I was riding, I did ride at the end of the "season" but I was expecting many more.

If I end up seeing more cyclists on the routes I am using, and don't appreciate their company I will simply switch to other roads. Most places I have toured there have been at least 2 choices of safe cycling roads.

I think promoting cycle-tourism can only help with educating motorists on how to deal with us and increase a good form of tourism for hosts and tourists alike.

I would like to get my hands on that map then! In my map collection I have half of the belgium map, and for the flemish region the routes are quite extensive. They are still wild, and it is nothing like a bike interstate.




Some EU cyclists might have had visions of some kind of Cycling 'freeway,' The European Cyclists Federation is supposedly working on an integrated system of cyclists friendly roads and pathways , but it does not appear those ideas anywhere match cyclists aspirations of some kind of international cyclists 'freeway.'

http://www.ecf.com/3188_1

http://www.ecf.com/87_1

I think there is something to say for having a major bike route - we pretty much have that in the USA with the Adventure Cycling routes. We've found a HUGE difference on the AC routes versus off. As soon as we stumble onto the route, all of a sudden there are more facilities for cyclists and the people don't seem as friendly and interested in what we are doing - they are more jaded. That being said, there are times when being on the main route is a good thing - just depends on what you want!

It's obvious that any time you get guidebooks and join organizations, or come here for advice, or even buy a bike that has been configured by someone else, that to a certain extent you are removing elements that could otherwise be part of your adventure. But that is what people want, they want an experience that is enough out of th eordinary to be interesting, but not quite like falling to earth (see Bowie Movie).

Even if one didn't like the effect that kind of thing has on a particular route, friendly cookie ladies, bicycle shops, and places to camp, the upside is that you now know exactly which routes to avoid, with confidence that many people will be on the established routes and you can blaze your own trail. The established routes may only meet certain criteria, like being able to carry more tourist. They aren't necesarilly better routes. Certianly there will be points were the number of choices are constricted, all potential routes logically go through a given pass, but that isn't the case everywhere.

You can still go on an adventure, just don't follow the prescribed route. ;)

The touring resources are great way to get started. Don't worry about throngs of bicycle tourists... people barely ride bicycles around here as it is.

ICars get used to seeing bikes on popular routes. That improves safety.

The more bike tourists, the merrier. There's plenty of room in the pool for everyone.

Well said. The more bikes the better.

Ginny Sullivan, a coordinator of the National Bike Route network gave a talk in Portland last Wednesday. The video/audio is posted at: http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/an-evening-with-ginny-sullivan-watch-the-video/ It explains what the National Bike Route Network is and how it differs from the current ACA routes. It also describes some of the challenges in getting this endeavour together. A key point for both items is the involvement/participation/sponsorship of the state and local transportation authorities in the effort. That makes it both a more difficult task, and gives bicycle travel more legitimacy as part of the officially maintained transportation network.

As to the original poster's question, no I don't think there is danger here that it will make bicycle travel wildly popular and hence spoil it in the process.

I've toured on modified versions of the ACA pacific coast and Northern tier routes, though I just copied info from other people's maps, rather than purchasing the maps myself. I've also done tours where I went out on my on and just made up routes as I went along. I think that both styles have their particular charms.

When biking to Wyoming and back from my home in Michigan two summers ago, I ran into constant difficulties. I had endless problems finding routes through Iowa. I traveled through some rather desolate sections of Nebraska, South Dakota and Wyoming, where I had to totally improvise stealth, and not so stealth overnight camping. I got kicked out of a city park in Mechanicsville, Iowa and had to bike twenty miles to the nearest state park at 1am after a 140+ mile day.
I'd travel stretches of over 100 miles where there were absolutely no services. Sure I could have done a bit more planning ahead of time, and figured out all of the logistics of where towns and stores were located along the way, as well as public camping. But it's a lot more fun, in my opinion, to just hit the road and see what happens. I like to pick a destination point on the map and see if I can get there with nothing other than a state road map.

But I've also enjoyed touring on established routes. I especially liked the Pacific Coast, where I found that I was sharing campsites with other bicycle tourists more often than not. Knowing which towns allowed camping in city parks, or which state parks had hiker/biker sites was incredibly helpful.

As long as people don't try to legally constrain cyclists of any stripe to designated bicycle routes I am all for the establishment of more standard routes, as they help to get novices into the sport. I am especially fearful of the prospect of bicycles eventually being constrained to bicycle paths and bike lanes, and being prohibited elsewhere.

But as long as there is no major push to do this, I think national and regional bike routes can only be a good thing. I wish my home state of Michigan would do a lot more to promote bicycle touring. We have over 1000 miles of coastline on the Great Lakes, and I truly believe that we should be just as popular a destination for bicycle touring as the Pacific coast is.

My other concern is that I think the visibility and awareness of bicyclists needs to be improved in general. If we have a lot of bicycles on a particular route, people in the parts of the country that the route crosses will definitely increase their awareness of cyclists. But people in other areas won't be similarly inoculated to the presence of bicycles on the road, which is an impediment to the overall adoption of bicycles in the general public.

I think national and regional bike routes can only be a good thing. I wish my home state of Michigan would do a lot more to promote bicycle touring. We have over 1000 miles of coastline on the Great Lakes, and I truly believe that we should be just as popular a destination for bicycle touring as the Pacific coast is.


I agree that the Great Lakes are great touring locations. The ACA should map routes around each lake especially the largest lake in the world, Lake Superior.

Here are some more European cycling routes

http://translate.google.nl/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.europafietsers.nl%2Findex.html&sl=nl&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8

Can't see it as a problem (or benefit ?) in our lifetime and there's nothing that says you won't be allowed off the beaten path.

Not so sure about that. I've been yelled at for not riding on the nearby bike path when riding on a perfectly suitable road. I would be wary of any system of bike routes that allows people to put bicyclers in a bicycle ghetto. I do most of my riding in the Great Lakes region where there are lots of county roads. I want as many of the roads as possible to be bicycleable, because I want to be able to get to ANY destination on my bicycle. A national route system isn't necessarily incompatible with that goal, but be careful of the intentions of some people. Some of the people who are advocates of multi-use paths have as their intention getting bicycles off the roads and away from cars. Beware of those people if they get involved in advocacy for a national route system.

Not so sure about that. I've been yelled at for not riding on the nearby bike path when riding on a perfectly suitable road. I would be wary of any system of bike routes that allows people to put bicyclers in a bicycle ghetto. I do most of my riding in the Great Lakes region where there are lots of county roads. I want as many of the roads as possible to be bicycleable, because I want to be able to get to ANY destination on my bicycle. A national route system isn't necessarily incompatible with that goal, but be careful of the intentions of some people. Some of the people who are advocates of multi-use paths have as their intention getting bicycles off the roads and away from cars. Beware of those people if they get involved in advocacy for a national route system.

+1000!!

I wish governments would just pave shoulders on all roads and be done with it.

As long as people don't try to legally constrain cyclists of any stripe to designated bicycle routes I am all for the establishment of more standard routes, as they help to get novices into the sport. I am especially fearful of the prospect of bicycles eventually being constrained to bicycle paths and bike lanes, and being prohibited elsewhere.


This is a legitimate fear if cycling ever grows in popularity in the US. I'd say it's a foregone conclusion _in urban areas_. Bike paths keep cars and bikes separated, which most drivers and many cyclists want.

However, despite pushes by a couple of nut-job politicians now and then, I don't see riding country roads ever being a problem. Establishing a designated route won't lead to prohibitions on parallel routes.

This all from my personal crystal ball, coupled with observations in Europe.

I live on Part of the Pacific Coast route and also the starting point of the Northern Tier. If I asked 100 people I bet I would be hard pressed to find 1 of those people who knew such a route existed.

Just reality folks. The only ones who are familiar in my area are the campgrounds and bike shops. It might be different in other parts of the country but from my experience I really don't think so.

Kyakdiver