Originally Posted by Rowan

Yes, the theory and personal, anecdotal observation is fine, and it may work for marginal towns that are not on mainstream tourist highways. But there are many hurdles involved.

I know all the principles of this. I worked in tourism for four years, and worked closely with a state government on encouraging promotion of bicycles to that island destination. The idea was that cyclists spent longer on the island than normal tourists, their daily spend was quite good (but still much less than that for other tourists), and they might visit towns and destinations that weren't on the normal tourist routes (highly unlikely as the routes by the cyclsits usually mimicked those of car and bus travellers).

The reality is... unless a cyclist is going to stay at motels or other non-camping accommodation each night (ie, as a credit card touring cycloist), then the spend that Indyfabz detailed would be taken up in just one room-night booking by a tourist travelling by just about any other means. Add on to that gas refills, restaurant and drink purchases, and so on, and the spend certainly starts to build in favour of other forms of travel.

Machka and I did our Vancouver Island trip as a credit card one, with three nights at motels and one night staying with friends. We ate out locally every night. We could have halved or quartered our costs by free-camping and preparing our own food, and the financial gain to the island would have been much, much less.

It certainly might be argued that towns along a designated bike route off the heavy tourist track will benefit from a cyclist's commercial activity. Or will they?

There is a 175km rail-trail being built in my region. People in one town are almost delirious with excitement about the commercial opportunities they think it will bring, because the initial feasibility study said it would bring them.

Sadly, I think the trail will become a $15 million white elephant worth virtually nothing in tourist dollars because it won't be sealed, won't be adequately maintained, will be shared with horses, has already achieved a high level of antagonism among local landholders, doesn't lead to really interesting tourist features, and doesn't have an adequate return transport service or easy access to transport from the destination. There's also a perfectly adequate highway, much of it with shoulders, that parellels the trail; if the cyclists aren't already heading into town, the trail is unlikely to bring them.

And really, let's face it, cyclists in general are a pretty mean lot and are always trying to save a buck here and there. Just read the many, many threads here about people wanting to do a tour on a next-to-nothing budget by stealth camping and cooking beans and rice for every meal.

Having said all that, the towns along the ACA routes may tell a different story because of the volume of cycle-tourists that traverse them. But somehow, I suspect not and that whatever tourist dollars they make are well supplemented by other motorised groups of travellers.