No need for fuss over bikes on the Heaphy

Nelson Mail editorial, May 3, 2011
Mountain bikers can finally ride the Heaphy Track again, and will be justifiably celebrating the chance to rediscover the pleasures of what is by all accounts one of New Zealand's most spectacular and rewarding routes. Early reports from those first on to the track following its opening for a five-month cycling season on Sunday suggest that the experience more than lives up to the billing. Hut bookings over winter - when the track is normally all but deserted - have been heavy, according to the Department of Conservation. Mountain-biking networks will no doubt spread the word that the top of the south is once again the place to find bench-track nirvana - at least for part of the year.
All of that is good news, and suggests vindication for those convinced of the wider benefits to the region that will come from attracting mountain bikers to tackle the Heaphy. But it is hard to shake the sense that the absurd delay by officialdom in dealing with the mountain-biking question has been an enormous waste of time, energy and opportunity, and has helped opposition to cyclists from some trampers to fester unnecessarily.
While the cyclists themselves have been fastidious not to criticise the authorities; and while it might be argued that now is a time to look forward, not back, the conservation bureaucracy should be held to account for its poor performance in responding to the case to let bikes back on to the track. Arguments about the reasons why - such as the awkward management mechanisms required for national parks - can only go so far. It has taken 15 years to address a relatively simple question. The marathon display of fluffing about should be an embarrassment to the conservation authorities.
It needs to be remembered that until 1995, before the Heaphy became part of the new Kahurangi National Park, cyclists were free to ride the track and did so in their thousands each year. There has been no suggestion in the years since that this was disastrous for the track, its other users, or its flora and fauna. Instead, once the national park was created, the presence of bikes fell foul of a rigid interpretation of the rules and, it seems, a hidebound philosophy that tracks such as the Heaphy were sacred places preserved for those prepared to walk them.
It is ironic, therefore, that for all the efforts of DOC to promote the Heaphy as a "Great Walk", tramper numbers have been largely static. And it is telling that cyclists are now queuing for a crack at the Heaphy, even if that means tackling it in the frigid depths of an alpine winter.
Given that the powers-that-be have decreed the return of cyclists is only on a three-year trial, those cyclists will be acutely aware that their behaviour will be watched hawkishly. There should be nothing to fear. Mountain biking has become a commonplace feature of the New Zealand outdoors and has proved that it can co-exist peaceably with other users. It is hard to imagine any but the most determined rogue element causing any kind of serious upset on the Heaphy. It would be nice to think that in three years, everyone can look back and wonder what the fuss - and the interminable delay - was all about.