It had started so promisingly: The canton of Zug invited bikers to indicate their preferred trails as a contribution to a Zug single trail network in the new structure plan. The first draft of the network did not make any waves - probably because IG Mountainbike Zug, as a representative of the community, assumed that all trails could still be used legally. The official network was only intended to attract the majority of bikers, they thought.

The new Zug Forest Act regulates things quite differently: the only single trails open to mountain bikers in the canton of Central Switzerland are those marked as bike trails in the structure plan. This meant that the draft structure plan, which had actually been public for over six months, suddenly became the focus of interest. And the bikers had to realize: They are allowed to register their wishes. However, only those that are acceptable to the landowners will be fulfilled.

Cantonal planner René Hutter points out that the process is more complex, with a total of around 40 parties submitting needs and critically assessing the concerns of others. In recent weeks, however, the discussion has come to a head over the unequal duel between mountain bikers and forest owners.

Referendum as a way forward

The same still applies in the canton of Zug as in many other cantons: Cycling is permitted on paths that are suitable for it. However, as soon as the new structure plan and the new article in the Forest Act come into force, biking will be prohibited on a large part of the single trails that bikers have been using for decades. Changing the structure plan to suit them is not very realistic.

This is why IG Mountainbike has taken the initiative and is collecting signatures to reject the new Forest Act. 1500 signatures are needed for the population to vote on the law. Getting them together is not easy, reveals President Manuel Sigrist. The new forest law is about much more than mountain biking. Sinking it at the ballot box is likely to be even more difficult than getting the vote through.

However, the IG Mountainbike initiative has already had one result: it has set the pulses of other people involved in the structure planning racing. Ruedi Bachmann from WaldZug, the association of Zug forest owners, criticizes: "We were in dialogue, examined the bikers' proposals and determined which trails we wanted to open up. That went back to them. And now they're throwing everything at our feet and still want everything!"

René Hutter, who is riding the new structure plan project, also reveals how little goodwill mountain bikers now enjoy. "Many forest owners are tough. They say: These are the trails we're giving up. If you want to open up more, you have to expropriate us."

It won't come to that. Instead, Hutter is trying to incorporate the 200 submissions on the cycle path network into the draft structure plan and take them into account where possible. He reveals that 146 of these relate to the bike network. Half of them come from mountain bikers who want more paths and half from landowners who are not prepared to give any more. Now more than ever,

The balance of power is not in favour of mountain bikers

Manuel Sigrist, President of IG Mountainbike Zug, defends the organization's approach: "We were able to provide input for the structure plan, but we didn't help develop it. We indicated which trails are particularly important for the bike community and in some areas the draft structure plan is quite far removed from this." The legislative referendum is the only means they have to fight a new regulation that is unfavorable to them. "It's clear that we won't only meet with approval."

The single trail network in its current form is good in some areas, but in other regions almost everything has been removed. In its written statement, IG Mountainbike explains that some bike clubs can no longer hold children's and youth training sessions on single trails as the suitable trails are not part of the network.

All of the bikers' arguments probably bounce off the balance of power. The corporations that maintain and manage the forests carry more weight. And they are happy with the network as set out in the draft. "Our side has already made many compromises," explains Bachmann from WaldZug. At the same time, they still have major problems with illegal trails. He then refers to the Zugerberg Trail, which was built for bikers - with the promise of bikers not to use certain trails. "This promise is now being softened more and more and the very steep trails in question are being used again."

In summary, it can be said: The legal sharpening of cycling on paths is not an advantage for mountain bikers in the canton of Zug. They thought they could now define an attractive network of single trails. And because signalized trails usually absorb a large proportion of bike traffic, a minority can continue to ride their favourite trails in a relaxed manner. For the time being, the signs in Zug do not point to relaxation. And even if things calm down, mountain bikers will hardly be granted any more narrow trails.