Gravel Cycling's Conflicted Soul

SBT GRVL Clashes With Locals Symptomatic Of Issues of Growth In Gravel Events 

 Long ago when Jeff Kerkove and myself set up Trans Iowa in 2004/2005, we had a few meetings and many late night brainstorming sessions regarding just how to set up a gravel based cycling event with a course of 300+ miles. We spoke with successful event directors both on the sanctioned, insured side and on the underground, grassroots side. There was a lot to consider.

One of those issues was based upon a concern for who lived along our route. Both in the rural areas and in the cities, towns, and villages we were to pass through. Keep in mind that we were concerned for these issues based upon an expected field of entrants of 50 riders or less. 

We went as far as to stuff fliers into mail boxes, send press releases out to local law enforcement agencies and governments, and we even went as far as to provide local emergency services numbers and locations to the riders all along the route. Sure, there were some things we left to chance, and for certain we did not get it all right. Not even close, but the point is that we had a mind for care of the venue, its residents, and for being as diplomatic as possible regarding our interactions and impacts. 

While the early gravel scene grew, it was an unspoken rule that, if you were putting on such an event, that care for the riders, the environment, and the local residents who lived on course was to be held as a very important thing. Communications to riders were important, and making sure there were no questions about how to "Ride Right", yield to local traffic, and to conduct yourself as a rider in such a way as to be a credit to the event were things all of us early event directors were keen to impart in our events. 

In my experience, the impact of Trans Iowa on the locals was always of utmost importance. I held relationships with locals as being critical to Trans Iowa's success. I also held that keeping things the way that we found them was as important as those relationships. Litter was not tolerated. We cleaned checkpoint locations and left no trace, as much as humanly possible. 

I could go on, and I could cite other event director's efforts in these areas as well. That said, these events, back in the 2000's, were smaller scaled, less impactful in many ways, and easier to govern because of that. Then something changed. Event promoters sought to become "bigger" and gravel started to slide toward becoming a money-making prospect. 

As event numbers grew the impact upon locals was greater.

I first noted this issue with larger fields of riders in 2014. After the Almanzo 100 there were several reports of locals who were angered by riders pulling off to the side of the road and urinating openly on private property or on the public roadway. There also were reports of some horses that got loose due to becoming agitated by the throngs of riders and running along with them. It was reported that one animal died due to overexertion. Trash on the roads was also reportedly an issue.

The reported rider total was over a thousand riders on a 100 mile course on public roads. While that may have been no big deal to the riders, you can see perhaps how the local residents were none too impressed. And the kicker? The Almanzo 100 was a free event. This same issue started becoming a problem as the Dirty Kanza 200 grew. There in Kansas the remoteness of the Flint Hills perhaps mitigated some of the potential issues, but trash in the form of nutritional wrappers and water bottles was still a big problem.

The DK200 was proactive there in instigating a post-event clean-up which was dubbed "Klean Kanza". The efforts not only cleared the course of the aftermath of 2000+ riders, but they even cleaned trash that wasn't the result of the race. That made a good impression upon local ranchers there.

However; in 2015, the infamous "Mud Year", (the OG Mud Year, not last year's reprise), I witnessed several riders jumping a fence to run in more stable ground. This was a big problem because those riders were trespassing on private land. I wrote a critical email to then RD Jim Cummings and the very next year a policy was put in place addressing the issue. This happening before it was an issue with landowners.

Littering, public urination, and trespassing on private landowner's fields are all things that are bad, but everything gets magnified due to the number of riders and the money brought in by the event. Event promoters like to point to economic windfalls to the towns and cities they affect with their event, and rightly so, but much of that "economic impact" is invisible to a farmer or rancher who is watching his roads be overtaken by cyclists and when they see some of these actions those cyclists are taking. 

Recent landowner concerns have brought scrutiny to the SBT GRVL event

When ranchers cannot pass down the road without dodging riders, or when residents can see riders relieving themselves along the road, it isn't going to go over well. This has cropped up again at SBT GRVL, an event that started in 2018 and boasts 3,000 riders in all their distances. 

Prize money is a big thing and SBT GRVL boasts having 180 Pro riders vying for $20,000 in prize money. 

All that is a non-starter with local ranchers though, who are complaining that riders are in their way of living day-to-day and not just on race day either. With events insisting on giving GPS files for courses days in advance, riders often are seen reconning the courses (open, public roads), and are becoming a further nuisance to local residents. 

Was this practice -riders reconning the courses or getting their equipment dialed in - part of the reason a cyclist was killed when struck by a man driving a truck just West of Emporia, Kansas the week of the 2022 Unbound event? It would appear that was the case. So, this is an issue that is not limited to the event out of Colorado. 

You can read more about the SBT GRVL issues HERE, HERE, and HERE. 

Proactive vs Reactive: In the case of SBT GRVL, these issues with the local ranchers cropped up right after the last event held in 2023. The organizers then shifted into reactive mode by holding two "listening" meetings where locals were encouraged to voice their concerns to the SBT GRVL staff. In light of the feedback, SBT GRVL has initiated several moves to address the concerns. Limiting two-way rider traffic, providing more portalets for riders to utilize to relieve themselves, and making sure private lands are noted to riders are just some of the measures being taken. SBT GRVL is even sending registered riders a video explaining all the measures being put in place and detailing rider etiquette. 

But are all these reactions a case of "too little, too late"? The answer may lay in the hands of the Routt County Commissioners who have yet to approve the new courses for SBT GRVL. It isn't a slam-dunk that they will approve, and that points to how this all may have been avoided by employing a bit more of a lens toward impacts to residents and land by SBT GRVL before they even held their first event.  

Even a more diligent approach to rider behaviors would have benefited the event and smoothed over a lot of their issues. It has been my experience, as an event promoter and attender of cycling events, that their is a definite air of entitlement within the human community, and in cyclists in particular, when it comes to competing. Anything deemed to have "gotten in the way" is dispatched with extreme prejudice and that includes common decency toward locals, sharing the road, or obeying basic rules of riding on open roads. Now - not every competitive cyclist is this way, but many are. Heck, you even find this happening at RAGBRAI, and that isn't even a rac........ Oh! Wait.......yeah, for some people even that event is a competition! 

A seemingly heavy-handed approach is better than hoping that the "Spirit of Gravel" will lead the disciples of Crushed Rock  to some angelic competitive behaviors. At least you would have been seen as being ahead of these issues. 

Triple-digit entry fees encourage a sense of entitlement.

Gravel's Roots At Odds With Gravel's Economics:

In the end, there is a bit of a disconnect with where many events held on gravel are at with what the intentions for gravel rides were in the beginning. Making a living off a resource that is free (roads) and an activity that has, for all intents and purposes, been turned into road racing on an unpaved surface in many cases, has created conflicts. Conflicts within Pro rider ranks. Conflicts with Pro rider needs versus amateur rider's needs. Conflicts with having large numbers of cyclists taking over normally quiet, empty rural byways. 

Long ago it was those "sanctioned road racing" ideas that were to be rejected at all costs by gravel riders. Maybe it should have been making money at this activity as a rider or as a promoter. Maybe gravel should have stayed small, under the radar, and "pure", but it did not, and it will never be that way again. We are where we are at. So now what?

I think a lot of events are going to end up in a pickle because landowners, communities, and governmental agencies are going to start seeing the economics of gravel and want in on it. Fees to hold events, get events permitted, have police escorts at events/road closures, (such as what SBT GRVL is doing for the Pro peloton), and more are going to put the screws to events like SBT GRVL to the point that they will end up like road races have. Gone. History. Too expensive and too complex to put on.

I don't see how entry fees are going to keep up with the increases in costs without big-time sponsorships, and those are going to be tough to come by in this economic climate. I actually predicted this in my 2020 "State of The Gravel Scene" post. This and the inevitable decline in Gravel™ as a "thing" at some point will bring the whole thing down to a place where we just don't see "big time" racing happening anymore. 

Meanwhile events try to walk a balance between "grassroots" ideals and Pro level, money-making sport. Very few have figured out that recipe and it still shows today.