Results 1 to 48 of 48
  1. #1
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140

    Does Wanting New Trails Mean You Don't Want To Protect The Resource?

    The RTCA trails planning survey is in and the results could be informative about whether mountain bikers can want new trails and also want to protect the resources by building new sustainable trails for their use. According to the person who is compiling the results of the recent survey of the 700+ responses more responders wanted new trails then any other question. Protection of the resource was second on the list.

    Does wanting to protect the resource mean that you as a mountain biker, hiker, equestrian or trail runner you don't want new sustainable trails?

  2. #2
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,576
    i don't think it's that cut & dry.

    Name:  deep-thoughts.png
Views: 368
Size:  207.7 KB

  3. #3
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    The Resource?
    What do you - or the survey - mean by "The Resource"?

    "it IS possible that you are faster or slower than anybody else who is having at least as much if not more or less fun"

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by perttime View Post
    The Resource?
    What do you - or the survey - mean by "The Resource"?
    Public land, in this case National Forest land. More specifically, the wildlife, the rocks, the soil, and the plants. What's not to get?

    Got any other info from the meeting last night renegademtnbiker?
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  5. #5
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    Ahhhh.... the natural resources.
    Ooops, I see this is the Arizona Forum and not the general Trail Building forum.
    I don't know your environment. Where I ride, a singletrack trail (or 10) through the land is in no way in conflict with preserving any natural resources.

    Sorry, I'd better bow out of this one.

    "it IS possible that you are faster or slower than anybody else who is having at least as much if not more or less fun"

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by perttime View Post
    Ahhhh.... the natural resources.
    Ooops, I see this is the Arizona Forum and not the general Trail Building forum.
    I don't know your environment. Where I ride, a singletrack trail (or 10) through the land is in no way in conflict with preserving any natural resources.

    Sorry, I'd better bow out of this one.
    Well, there wasn't much context form the OP to run with either. It does appear that building trail in AZ is much harder than elsewhere, perhaps because the resources are more fragile. Hard to say.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    984
    How was the original poll question phrased? The two are not mutually exclusive. I would venture a guess that most mountain bikers are also in favor of protecting the resource. Not only is it in our (and every other trail user's) interest to do so, getting out of the rat race and off the pavement, and going off on two wheels INTO the "resource" is why we ride.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,156
    Why does one have to assume that trails destroy a resource? A trail is nothing more than a thin ribbon in larger environment. I actually thing that people are more likely to appreciate and therefore protect an environment they can see the beauty of from with in.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BIGHORN LEW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    778
    [QUOTE=JoePAz; I actually thing that people are more likely to appreciate and therefore protect an environment they can see the beauty of from with in.[/QUOTE]

    I emphatically agree! keeping the resource pure and beautiful will have no public appreciation if no access is permitted. the value of the resource is dependant on its usability. The earth is here for mans use.
    RAM speed: UP, UP, and away....!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by BIGHORN LEW View Post
    I emphatically agree! keeping the resource pure and beautiful will have no public appreciation if no access is permitted. the value of the resource is dependant on its usability. The earth is here for mans use.
    A poorly routed trail does indeed become resource damage, no matter how many nature lovers get to appreciate nature while hiking or riding a bike or horse on it. Eventually it may become a scar on the land that is hard to heal or mitigate. A properly routed trail, on the other hand, is a thing of beauty.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  11. #11
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,685
    What is RTCA ?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by BIGHORN LEW View Post
    I emphatically agree! keeping the resource pure and beautiful will have no public appreciation if no access is permitted. the value of the resource is dependant on its usability. The earth is here for mans use.
    and for future generations...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SunnyNAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    What is RTCA ?
    Rat Terrier Club of America

  14. #14
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,685
    Good I was afraid it was something with Red Rock in it.

  15. #15
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    First of all we need to thank Patrick Kell and IMBA for posting the need to fill out the survey. The person moderating the RTCA meetings and monitoring the survey as the days progressed started that when IMBA put out the survey to their AZ members the responses were dramatic.

    I think the actual responses were around 740, so it will be interesting what else will be learned from the answers.

    This is the interesting part about how the results were explained. It was kind of like mountain bikers want more trails and hikers want to protect the resource. When we get the raw data back we will be able to see if the majority of mountain bikers also were into protecting the resource.

    When the survey was originally announced the question was asked if the survey could go to anyone? The answer was yes but the facilitator realized the group with the best way to communicate to their friends and people of similar interest were going to have a better outcome with what the majority of people want who have the same interest.

    At the meeting it was never suggested that the mountain biker were in favor of protecting the resource as well as wanting new trails.

    At the end of the meeting we did a little brain storming about how to get private funding and volunteers to help with the future trail maintenance needs. The reason for that discussion was that over 65% of people who responded on the survey wanted the FS to pay for all the maintenance. The facilitator said grants are becoming scarce and budgets are supposed to be reduced 5%.

    This crazy mountain biker at the meeting asked the question why the Adopt-a-Trail maintenance program was never been discussed at any of the meetings? You would have thought a bomb went off at the meeting.

    The temporary person incharge of the Sedona FS would not answer the question. So we moved onto another idea called PEER PRESSURE. That same crazy mountain biker chimed in and said he is getting his fellow mountain biking friends to adopt the user created system trails that hae feels will be easy to maintain since the person who routed them took sustainability into consideration.

    He said he is trying to show the FS that his friends can easily maintain properly built trails and that going forward if the FS were to adopt other well built user created trails they also would be easy to maintain.

    The facilitator seemed very frustrated with the crazy mountain bikers POV, and that when he mentioned he recruited four of his friends to participate in the Adopt-a-Trail program she became more frustrated.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    First of all we need to thank Patrick Kell and IMBA for posting the need to fill out the survey. The person moderating the RTCA meetings and monitoring the survey as the days progressed started that when IMBA put out the survey to their AZ members the responses were dramatic.

    I think the actual responses were around 740, so it will be interesting what else will be learned from the answers.

    This is the interesting part about how the results were explained. It was kind of like mountain bikers want more trails and hikers want to protect the resource. When we get the raw data back we will be able to see if the majority of mountain bikers also were into protecting the resource.

    When the survey was originally announced the question was asked if the survey could go to anyone? The answer was yes but the facilitator realized the group with the best way to communicate to their friends and people of similar interest were going to have a better outcome with what the majority of people want who have the same interest.

    At the meeting it was never suggested that the mountain biker were in favor of protecting the resource as well as wanting new trails.

    At the end of the meeting we did a little brain storming about how to get private funding and volunteers to help with the future trail maintenance needs. The reason for that discussion was that over 65% of people who responded on the survey wanted the FS to pay for all the maintenance. The facilitator said grants are becoming scarce and budgets are supposed to be reduced 5%.

    This crazy mountain biker at the meeting asked the question why the Adopt-a-Trail maintenance program was never been discussed at any of the meetings? You would have thought a bomb went off at the meeting.

    The temporary person incharge of the Sedona FS would not answer the question. So we moved onto another idea called PEER PRESSURE. That same crazy mountain biker chimed in and said he is getting his fellow mountain biking friends to adopt the user created system trails that hae feels will be easy to maintain since the person who routed them took sustainability into consideration.

    He said he is trying to show the FS that his friends can easily maintain properly built trails and that going forward if the FS were to adopt other well built user created trails they also would be easy to maintain.

    The facilitator seemed very frustrated with the crazy mountain bikers POV, and that when he mentioned he recruited four of his friends to participate in the Adopt-a-Trail program she became more frustrated.
    Renegade, I'm not sure what the agenda is here. Are you shedding light on what a sham the RTCA process is or what? Your opening query in post #1 sounds like a rhetorical question but I'm not exactly sure what point your trying to make?

    FYI. Saturday, September 7th 2013 The next Adopt a Trail Class is coming right up. Call Forrest Saville for more information and to register. sfsaville@fs.fed.us or 928-606-1748.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  17. #17
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,685
    RTCA ? what does it mean?

  18. #18
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    RTCA ? what does it mean?
    I think if you Google it you will find your answer.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    RTCA ? what does it mean?
    NPS River Trails Conservation and Assistance Program. You can read all about it here:
    https://docs.google.com/folderview?i...0l4Z0wxYks2NUk
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,108
    I think this is a riddle.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by raisingarizona View Post
    I think this is a riddle.
    Cat and mouse.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    Renegade, I'm not sure what the agenda is here. Are you shedding light on what a sham the RTCA process is or what? Your opening query in post #1 sounds like a rhetorical question but I'm not exactly sure what point your trying to make?

    FYI. Saturday, September 7th 2013 The next Adopt a Trail Class is coming right up. Call Forrest Saville for more information and to register. sfsaville@fs.fed.us or 928-606-1748.
    Others have said the RTCA process is a shame. I think the jury is out on whether it is true or not. I have taken the position to attend as many meetings as possible, so I can make my own decision.

    Several bike shop owners haven't attended since they seem to have higher priorities. The meetings started out with a lot of attendees (over 100) and this last meeting we were down to about fifty.

    What I do know for sure is that the FS is not good at marketing. I also know they have not previously marketed the Adopt-a-Trail program at their trail planning meetings. I also know Jennifer Burns believes it is cheaper to build a new trail from scratch rather than adopting a perfectly sustainable user built trail. I also know you can't contribute money directly to the adoption of a user created trail you may like. I also know that that the FS does poor quality maps. I also know that Adrian and Forest who work for the FS are really nice people and are trying their best.

    What I don't know is whether its personal and whether the brushing rules have changed. An equestrian who attended the meetings to improve safety between equestrians and other users wanted better line of site on the trails, I don't think he ever got an answer if the FS would support that concept. Maybe Justin has some insight about that issue.

    The survey indicated that the majority of people who answered the survey want new trails. The majority of people who attended the meetings said they want new trails. I would assume if we get a bunch of new sustainable trails the RTCA process will have been successful.

    We will have to wait and see. If the FS were to lift the emergency trail closure that would certainly show some good intentions.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    We will have to wait and see. If the FS were to lift the emergency trail closure that would certainly show some good intentions.
    This^^^
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    I also know Jennifer Burns believes it is cheaper to build a new trail from scratch rather than adopting a perfectly sustainable user built trail.

    What I don't know is whether its personal and whether the brushing rules have changed. An equestrian who attended the meetings to improve safety between equestrians and other users wanted better line of site on the trails, I don't think he ever got an answer if the FS would support that concept. Maybe Justin has some insight about that issue.
    Please name the 'perfectly sustainable' user built trails. Sustainable includes impacts on cultural resources, hydrology, neighborhoods, etc.

    The problem with equestrians is that trails are not always built to their standards. If there were more equestrians on the system trails, I imagine the FS would be more likely to enforce the travel management objectives for each trail with special orders. If I could do that, I would probably exclude equestrians from 75% of the existing trails and try to get them a few nicer long loops to make up for it.

    Brushing is a really difficult idea for trail workers to grasp in a desert environment. Too much and it completely changes the trail into a straight highway. It takes a good amount of thought to do it correctly and also make it seem like it has always been that way.

    The adopt a trail program is great but it in no way solves the problem with the 'legacy' system trails in Sedona. Light maintenance is not the issue. These trails need 'capital improvements' and 'heavy maintenance' to get to the point of not being a money pit. Too many old jeep roads turned into trails basically.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by justinwp View Post
    Please name the 'perfectly sustainable' user built trails. Sustainable includes impacts on cultural resources, hydrology, neighborhoods, etc.

    The problem with equestrians is that trails are not always built to their standards. If there were more equestrians on the system trails, I imagine the FS would be more likely to enforce the travel management objectives for each trail with special orders. If I could do that, I would probably exclude equestrians from 75% of the existing trails and try to get them a few nicer long loops to make up for it.

    Brushing is a really difficult idea for trail workers to grasp in a desert environment. Too much and it completely changes the trail into a straight highway. It takes a good amount of thought to do it correctly and also make it seem like it has always been that way.

    The adopt a trail program is great but it in no way solves the problem with the 'legacy' system trails in Sedona. Light maintenance is not the issue. These trails need 'capital improvements' and 'heavy maintenance' to get to the point of not being a money pit. Too many old jeep roads turned into trails basically.
    No trail is perfect but I believe Special Ed fulfilled all of the requirements you list. The arch report showed no or little resource impact and I can't see how it affected nearby neighborhoods. Hydrology is a controversial subject in Sedona and is often invoked to indicate impacts when there is little evidence to support the claim (for example, siltation and turbidity in Oak Creek). IMO, there were no erosion issues associated with the tread and routing of Special Ed, including the switchbacks. It was closed for other reasons and is perhaps what Renegade means by "personal".

    Anaconda is another example of a user-built trail that was sustainably built. Renegade is mostly correct in the assertion that the user-built trails are more sustainable than the existing system trails but what gets lost is most of the "legacy" trails were also user-built (albeit back in the day when nobody knew what a sustainable trail was). Even Llama which was user-built in the late 90s has some bad, fallline sections. The FS in the Red Rock District did not build any trails in the 1990s that were not reroutes of existing social trails. Justin, correct me if I'm wrong but Huckabee is the lone exception. A little bit of Secret Trail perhaps and a dash of Broken Arrow. The southern end of Girdner. My point is that it was the locals that had the vision to create and place trails in places the FS would never have dreamed of or seen the need. More recently the FS has stepped up to the plate and turned the Soldier Pass area into a riding destination area when previously it was a spiderweb of social trails that nobody could navigate except those on the MtnBike Heaven sunday ride. The Yavapai Vista trails are good too. So, the FS is doing good things as well as doing some bad things like blaming all trail construction on mtn bikers when that is clearly not the case. As well as excluding bikers from certain trails but not other user groups. That is discrimination.

    Hopefully, the RTCA process will work. The locals and advocacy groups have had a seat at the table. The process is frustrating but the golden age of illegal trailbuilding is over. Hence the closure to only one user group to prove a point. The FS is going to get control of their backyard whether the locals like it or not. New trails are needed because from a mtn biker perspective the trails that are fun to ride are getting increasingly crowded. I don't bother with Chuckwagon anymore on a weekend. With the new trailhead there's an endless parade of hikers going to vultee arch. There will be more and more user conflicts. What is needed is more advocacy and locals continuing to work with the FS. Continued conflict is not going to succeed. It's a pity IMBA and SMBC have parted ways.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  26. #26
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by justinwp View Post
    Please name the 'perfectly sustainable' user built trails. Sustainable includes impacts on cultural resources, hydrology, neighborhoods, etc.

    The problem with equestrians is that trails are not always built to their standards. If there were more equestrians on the system trails, I imagine the FS would be more likely to enforce the travel management objectives for each trail with special orders. If I could do that, I would probably exclude equestrians from 75% of the existing trails and try to get them a few nicer long loops to make up for it.

    Brushing is a really difficult idea for trail workers to grasp in a desert environment. Too much and it completely changes the trail into a straight highway. It takes a good amount of thought to do it correctly and also make it seem like it has always been that way.

    The adopt a trail program is great but it in no way solves the problem with the 'legacy' system trails in Sedona. Light maintenance is not the issue. These trails need 'capital improvements' and 'heavy maintenance' to get to the point of not being a money pit. Too many old jeep roads turned into trails basically.
    Justin:

    I one hundred percent agree with what you said.

    First of all there are no perfectly built user created trails you are correct there. The closest to perfect is Anaconda, but I am sure you know of some issue with that one, that someone with your experience is aware of.

    I am also curious what concerns you might have with the Aerie trail since it was built by the mountain bike community not the FS for the most part. It was routed by a mountain biker and built by mountain bikers without any supervision form the FS. Your friend Paul did come in and make a motorcycle berm with two dump truck loads of rock and dirt that was way over kill but who cares about that kind of expense when the Aerie development is paying the bill. The FS did rock in the drainage crossings much better and I think the was certainly a good thing long term.

    Back on topic, my user built trails I think fit into my idea of a well built user created trail are: Chuck Wagon, Mescal, Anaconda, Gunsmoke now To Mescal/To Long Canyon, Western Civ, Last Frontier, Drano, Special Ed, Sketch, Double D, Pyramid, Witch Doctor, Checkpoint Charlie, Windsurfer, Airport Viewpoint, Catwalk and the Radars. In my opinion those trails could be adopted by one person each and easily maintained.

    Trails like Hiline and Hangover have bigger issues that will need to be addressed with a more experienced trail adopter. I know some guys who would love to work on Hangover who love to ride that trail, but they want to do the work when they are there and see a problem and the Adopt-a-Trail program doesn't work that way. We know Hiline will always be taken care of by PK as long as he is alive.


    As you stated the legacy trails are the BIG problem and that is where the majority of the future maintenance will be spent. What is interesting is a trail like Huckaby. There have been tens of thousands of dollars spent on that trail and the work is still going on. It wasn't user created it was some kind of FS project that Americore was involved in.

    Now we also have the Soldiers Wash trail system that had to be re-routed, armored, re-rerouted, lightly brush, re-brushed, etc. That trail system was adopted under the Adopt-a-Trail program by a local bike shop since it is close to their shop and has some
    great loop potential for high intermediate skilled riders. There are also some secret secret trails in the FS system trails that make it even a more fun place to ride.

    For some reason there is going to be a bunch of volunteer time spent there over National Trail day at the end of September. I am really curious what the game plan is on that day. Two years ago I know a guy who signed up for doing a bunch of trail work on National Trail day and they had to cancel the event since no one else signed up for the West Fork project.

    Anyway I am hoping a bunch of people show up this year and take care of sections I think need some work on. For example I don't know who fixed the lead in section of Adobe Jack from the trailhead (Jennifer said she didn't do it), but that was a great improvement. There are somewhat short sections that when improved a little could make for a better experience for the lesser skilled riders. If they bring in those secret secret trails that would really be a plus.

    Talk about legacy how about the Munds Wagon trail? All the re-route sections you helped with on the volunteer day are holding up really good. There is still a ton of work that needs to be done on that trail and the guy who adopted it is way over his head due to the poor historical routing of that trail. How about Schnebly Hill road, it is in the worst condition ever, but the commercial jeepers love it that way?

    That leaves trails like Made in the Shade, Slim Shady and Easy Breezy. Those were all user created and make for super great connectors, but they have resource issues that were dealt with in a creative way. When someone wants to get something done it can be done. Those trails will certainly need FS or volunteer help in the future by more than just one adoptee.

    The last part that was left out is all the hiking and equestrian only legacy trails like Doe Mountain, Jacks Canyon, etc. The mountain bikers have stepped up for some of there favorite user created trails will the hiking and equestrian community step up and fix a trail like Jack Canyon or should it be closed like the Carroll Canyon trails under an emergency closure order due to unsustainablity issues?

    I do know of two hikers that adopted favorite mountain bike trails like Mystic and Baldwin so I am not saying hikers aren't stepping up, but I know of no equestrians who have adopted any of their favorite trails.

    There are certainly lots of dynamics at work with the RTCA Trails Planning Process. When Cate got up and announced that the majority of votes of the attendees and the online survey were for more new trails she looked very distraught. I am glad I was there to chronicle what I thought her demeanor was. It wasn't like we were at a Whistler Town Council meeting like we had just voted to fund a new trail project like Kill Me Thrill Me.

    When the FS talks about resource issues is there ever a comparative analysis done of where the really really really BIG resource issues are: like the current forest fire in California or the forest fire a couple years ago in Flagstaff or the more recent tragic one in Yarnel? How many endangered species of insects or birds are being killed in those situations, how much sediment is going to occur due to those fires. It seems like there are much bigger issues than trails, but what do I know I am only a renegade mountain biker.

    Is it because a forest fire is natural that there can never be a comparative analysis by the FS? If that question was asked at the last RTCA meeting what do YOU think the answer would be?

  27. #27
    white mountains
    Reputation: WM-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    63
    I have and do ride personally maintained deer/elk trails up here in the mountains. In one case I have seen a herd of elk do more "damage" then my bike could ever do. In my mind if a collective regulatory agency is defining "nature" it is wise to question their agenda. I'm all for protecting the environment but man has to be a part of the equation not eliminated from it. To appreciate nature you have to be in it and use its resources freely. You can not legislate respect it has to be taught. What better way to learn respect for nature then to build a trail through miles of forest, use it regularly, and then maintain it?... imo... nothing

  28. #28
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by WM-Rider View Post
    I have and do ride personally maintained deer/elk trails up here in the mountains. In one case I have seen a herd of elk do more "damage" then my bike could ever do. In my mind if a collective regulatory agency is defining "nature" it is wise to question their agenda. I'm all for protecting the environment but man has to be a part of the equation not eliminated from it. To appreciate nature you have to be in it and use its resources freely. You can not legislate respect it has to be taught. What better way to learn respect for nature then to build a trail through miles of forest, use it regularly, and then maintain it?... imo... nothing
    You have made a interesting point I totally agree with you about. That is the interest you get from a user sustainable created trail as compared to a poorly routed legacy trail where all the people who routed it are long gone.

    I call that interest a sense of ownership and wanting the trail to continue to be a good work product by doing potential maintenance on it after it is completed. There isn't that same sense of ownership with an older legacy trail that is in constant need of maintenance from a volunteer crew. Maybe those legacy types of trails should be eliminated from the system.

    I think Justin mentioned previously that he is working on a trail that is 1/2 mile long and the cost to reconstruct or maintain the trail has been $500,000. It would be interesting to know if that trail was causing resource damage and if so will that resource damage be fully negated in the future, I would certainly hope so for that kind of money.

    It would also be good to know if the trail could have been closed to save the $500,000 expense and forget about the user experience that is being gained on that trail. As we can all appreciate these are complicated issues from a public experience stand point and the dollars needed to support that experience.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    You have made a interesting point I totally agree with you about. That is the interest you get from a user sustainable created trail as compared to a poorly routed legacy trail where all the people who routed it are long gone.

    I call that interest a sense of ownership and wanting the trail to continue to be a good work product by doing potential maintenance on it after it is completed. There isn't that same sense of ownership with an older legacy trail that is in constant need of maintenance from a volunteer crew. Maybe those legacy types of trails should be eliminated from the system.

    I think Justin mentioned previously that he is working on a trail that is 1/2 mile long and the cost to reconstruct or maintain the trail has been $500,000. It would be interesting to know if that trail was causing resource damage and if so will that resource damage be fully negated in the future, I would certainly hope so for that kind of money.

    It would also be good to know if the trail could have been closed to save the $500,000 expense and forget about the user experience that is being gained on that trail. As we can all appreciate these are complicated issues from a public experience stand point and the dollars needed to support that experience.
    Those kind of resources getting thrown at a trail could only be NPS. Hermit trail at Grand Canyon perhaps?
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  30. #30
    white mountains
    Reputation: WM-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    63
    Set up a private agency run by bike enthusiasts and you could probably make money for more trails. Not that hard to imagine the waste that could be saved getting away from ridiculous regulations! A high quality MTB experience, people and advertisers would flock to. Maintenance could be "fee" paid for trail use and even advertisement of any product through the organization. Respect for the environment would grow exponentially and the product of natural resources could be defined in a way that made sense and not imposed. $500,000 per half mile could be earnings not expense... just sayin it's not as crazy sounding as some of the other stuff going on.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,108
    Quote Originally Posted by WM-Rider View Post
    Set up a private agency run by bike enthusiasts and you could probably make money for more trails. Not that hard to imagine the waste that could be saved getting away from ridiculous regulations! A high quality MTB experience, people and advertisers would flock to. Maintenance could be "fee" paid for trail use and even advertisement of any product through the organization. Respect for the environment would grow exponentially and the product of natural resources could be defined in a way that made sense and not imposed. $500,000 per half mile could be earnings not expense... just sayin it's not as crazy sounding as some of the other stuff going on.
    This entirely makes way too much sense.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by raisingarizona View Post
    This entirely makes way too much sense.
    I would definitely support a non-profit organization, Sedona or Flagstaff, that had a paid staff that 100% worked on trails as well as advocacy. Such a situation exists in Park City, no? FBO is all volunteer as are VVVC and SMBC.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  33. #33
    white mountains
    Reputation: WM-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    I would definitely support a non-profit organization, Sedona or Flagstaff, that had a paid staff that 100% worked on trails as well as advocacy. Such a situation exists in Park City, no? FBO is all volunteer as are VVVC and SMBC.
    If it's non-profit or profit...... set it up like a business.

    Ready?....

    First, purposes and boundaries.

    1) Mission statement

    2) Objectives

    Make them simple and clear and you'll have a better start then the NFS does!

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    428
    Something like this ?

    High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew - Page Site

    The Mission of The High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew

    "To develop and empower volunteers of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds to enjoy in the participation of preservation and stewardship, and restoration of our public lands and facilities".

    We serve our mission by developing and implementing an array of volunteer opportunities in collaboration with and in support of our Partners, the Public Land Managers (PLM) such as the USFS, Department of Fish and Game and other public Land Management Agencies.

    We maintain the highest standards for all of our volunteers and employees related to safety, environmental standards, general work, correct building practices and trail work. Collaborating with our PLM partners we offer our volunteers opportunities to perform the day to day tasks required to assist them in service our natural resources. These vocational opportunities for youth and adults will foster the next generation's belief that stewardship of our environment should be more than an occasional practice and offer the possibility that it might become a career path. Examples of some training opportunities are leadership skills, personal growth, low impact trail building, data collection, and the maintenance and repair of all aspects of forest facilities, including; fences, bridges, buildings and related structures.

    We create and maintain a culture of belonging and respect through healthy communication with others, provide a non-political, non-religious environment that excludes no person or group of people and foster a culturally diverse and sensitive environment in all of our activities. Partnerships will be built and maintained with community organizations including youth services providers, under-served groups, educational institutions; health services providers, diverse volunteer organizations and other outdoor groups. High dietary standards are maintained that are nutritionally responsible and allow for ethnically diverse tastes and provide the opportunity for diverse diet experiences for all. A positive relationship with our volunteers is very important and will be measured with satisfaction surveys. The dissemination of information and communication will be reliable, unbiased, inclusive and accurate. Procedures and policies are in place to ensure that our volunteers are given opportunities for personal growth, job training, positive experiences and Stewardship. Working with our partners we will perform needed stewardship while maintaining high work and cultural standards.

  35. #35
    white mountains
    Reputation: WM-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Azpilot View Post
    Something like this ?

    High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew - Page Site

    The Mission of The High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew

    "To develop and empower volunteers of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds to enjoy in the participation of preservation and stewardship, and restoration of our public lands and facilities".

    We serve our mission by developing and implementing an array of volunteer opportunities in collaboration with and in support of our Partners, the Public Land Managers (PLM) such as the USFS, Department of Fish and Game and other public Land Management Agencies.

    We maintain the highest standards for all of our volunteers and employees related to safety, environmental standards, general work, correct building practices and trail work. Collaborating with our PLM partners we offer our volunteers opportunities to perform the day to day tasks required to assist them in service our natural resources. These vocational opportunities for youth and adults will foster the next generation's belief that stewardship of our environment should be more than an occasional practice and offer the possibility that it might become a career path. Examples of some training opportunities are leadership skills, personal growth, low impact trail building, data collection, and the maintenance and repair of all aspects of forest facilities, including; fences, bridges, buildings and related structures.

    We create and maintain a culture of belonging and respect through healthy communication with others, provide a non-political, non-religious environment that excludes no person or group of people and foster a culturally diverse and sensitive environment in all of our activities. Partnerships will be built and maintained with community organizations including youth services providers, under-served groups, educational institutions; health services providers, diverse volunteer organizations and other outdoor groups. High dietary standards are maintained that are nutritionally responsible and allow for ethnically diverse tastes and provide the opportunity for diverse diet experiences for all. A positive relationship with our volunteers is very important and will be measured with satisfaction surveys. The dissemination of information and communication will be reliable, unbiased, inclusive and accurate. Procedures and policies are in place to ensure that our volunteers are given opportunities for personal growth, job training, positive experiences and Stewardship. Working with our partners we will perform needed stewardship while maintaining high work and cultural standards.
    Yep... right idea. Mission statement at the beginning followed by objectives.

    imho.... I lean towards "profit" business. But since this is an "open source" type of scenario I'm "open" to non-profit. But this could be debated later. So I would try to set up purposes and boundaries without a stance. It could work both ways then.

    Top successful business have a one sentence mission statement. Most objectives are general, numbered by priorities, and only specific to statement boundaries, if that makes sense. For instance... "we want to go 250 mph", not "here's how we are going to go 250 mph".

    Anyways, this is only how I would do it.... I'm not always right, in fact rarely according to my... never mind.

  36. #36
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    25,511
    We have an organization up here that advocates for and gets trails built.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Singl...s/197768025365

    I've been out the last few weeks building new trail. Absolutely amazing stuff, like awesome bike-park stuff you usually only find at ski resorts (but you can also roll around or over everything too).
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  37. #37
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    25,511
    Quote Originally Posted by WM-Rider View Post
    To appreciate nature you have to be in it and use its resources freely.
    No, you don't. It shouldn't be a free-for-all. I've seen the consequences of human free-for-alls.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  38. #38
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    We have an organization up here that advocates for and gets trails built.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Singl...s/197768025365

    I've been out the last few weeks building new trail. Absolutely amazing stuff, like awesome bike-park stuff you usually only find at ski resorts (but you can also roll around or over everything too).
    OK since this post is about mountain bikers also being into resource preservation I appreciate you providing another example of a bunch of enthusiastic mountain bikers out on their own making sustainable trails for themselves and future generations to enjoy.

    Mark Zuckerberg I think this Facebook thing is pretty good for networking to get new trails built. Now all we need is permission. We got a lot accomplished without permission so now we get to see how getting permission works.

    The consensus is the majority want new trails, so one would hope that will happen sooner than later. Does this picture tell you anything?
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    120
    I have always thought something like this would be a great trail to add between Flagstaff and Sedona: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6QX...it?usp=sharing

    Just need to start a 501c3 and raise $300k... The most expensive parts would be fixing the few sections of the Kachina trail and crossing Munds Canyon. Nothing but grazing going on in most of these areas anyway. Could be something like the Rainbow Rim Trail on the north rim of the GCNP but not be a 3-4 hour drive.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,632
    Quote Originally Posted by justinwp View Post
    I have always thought something like this would be a great trail to add between Flagstaff and Sedona: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6QX...it?usp=sharing

    Just need to start a 501c3 and raise $300k... The most expensive parts would be fixing the few sections of the Kachina trail and crossing Munds Canyon. Nothing but grazing going on in most of these areas anyway. Could be something like the Rainbow Rim Trail on the north rim of the GCNP but not be a 3-4 hour drive.
    I believe there's a variant of that route being proposed as one of the new trails in the RTCA.
    "Fart in a paper bag, after eating the #17 plate from filibertos. STRAVA!" M77Ranger.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    120
    It won't happen without a dedicated group since there is the big trail project(singletrack motorized) to Munds Park on the other side of 17. But if they put it in the plan, and it is included, we have the fasttrack to get it built.
    Professional Trail Builder and Guvmint Employee

  42. #42
    livin' the dream......
    Reputation: tjkm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,625
    I argue that there is no such thing as a sustainable trail. A 'sustainable trail' will eventually degrade just like a 'non sustainable trail'. The degradation will just take longer to occur.

    Sustainability is the most over used buzzword out there, but that is just my .02

  43. #43
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by tjkm View Post
    I argue that there is no such thing as a sustainable trail. A 'sustainable trail' will eventually degrade just like a 'non sustainable trail'. The degradation will just take longer to occur.

    Sustainability is the most over used buzzword out there, but that is just my .02
    You are 100% correct, in the early days the earth wasn't round until it was hit with asteroids containing water which turned into rain which eroded the earth's jagged surface and made it rounder. This process of natural erosion is always going on and is millions (billions?) of times greater than what is occurring on our popular sustainable/unsustainable trails we humans enjoy using.

    Like you said by using modern trail building techniques the erosion process is slowed down considerably, but not eliminated. Are you OK with that, or do you have difficulty accepting any insignificant man made erosion no matter where it comes from?

    I went on a ride today on some of my favorite trails after two days of heavy rainfall which has washes running water that are normally dry. There were sections of the trails we ride the showed drainage issues. My feeling is that with a little bit of work those problematic spots could be dealt with before they created future problems.

  44. #44
    livin' the dream......
    Reputation: tjkm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,625
    Erosion is going to happen, regardless of the man made effort. I am not suggesting that the effort not be put in, but calling it 'sustainable' implies (to me) that it should be a one shot deal. Route the trail in with modern building standards, and the trail should be fine. We both know that is not the case though, as you experienced with the trails you ride. I see this in the McDowells, were "new, sustainable trails' have been routed, and are already torn up after a few rain events.

    My issue is with the word, more than anything. And yes, I volunteer and do trail work!!

  45. #45
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    25,511
    Quote Originally Posted by tjkm View Post
    I argue that there is no such thing as a sustainable trail. A 'sustainable trail' will eventually degrade just like a 'non sustainable trail'. The degradation will just take longer to occur.

    Sustainability is the most over used buzzword out there, but that is just my .02
    Agree. Some trails are tons of fun and not "sustainable", but given work and re-routes over time, they are permanent and fun. The idea that we have to build every trail as a minimal grade with reversals everywhere is flawed logic, although it doesn't mean we build fall-line washouts either. It's a balance. Using the natural terrain and coming up with unique ideas is where it's at, but it's time consuming and man-hour intensive. If we really abided by the "sustainable trail" fallacy we'd have no trails like Wasabi, a trail that's been there for over a decade. I guarantee that every trail built by man will be reclaimed by nature over time with no work and traffic.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  46. #46
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    in the early days the earth wasn't round until it was hit with asteroids containing water which turned into rain which eroded the earth's jagged surface and made it rounder.
    (serious response part) wow, i never though of it that way. how come carl sagan never covered this? i used to watch the shit out of Cosmos as akid

    Quote Originally Posted by RenegadeMtnBiker View Post
    This process of natural erosion is always going on
    usually when i wake up in the morning...

  47. #47
    livin' the dream......
    Reputation: tjkm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,625
    There are already some 'new' trails in the Brown's Ranch area (Pima & Dynamite) that are already being taken back, and some that will be destroyed after a few good storms. I love the half-assed switch backs that traverse the fall line for a bit, then just curve up hill in the fall line, then traverse the hill again. The eight to ten feet in the fall line are already jacked up on Browns Mountain, and that trail has not officially opened yet!

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chalkpaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    633
    Quote Originally Posted by justinwp View Post
    It won't happen without a dedicated group since there is the big trail project(singletrack motorized) to Munds Park on the other side of 17. But if they put it in the plan, and it is included, we have the fasttrack to get it built.
    How can one get a non-motorized trail proposal in with the Munds Park project? I have a gps track and thats about it. Much of the route follows existing singletrack and dirt roads. New construction would take place between Kelly Canyon and James Canyon. Once south of James, it would be nice to have new trail instead of road to Munds Park. From Munds, the is a little bit of I-17 to contend with until bumping into Schnebly Hill Road.
    There is a big difference between ripping and skidding.

Similar Threads

  1. Galbraith Trails Resource
    By rbwen in forum Washington
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-25-2013, 09:39 PM
  2. Good resource?
    By JoshC58 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-02-2013, 10:13 AM
  3. commuting path resource?
    By zukrider in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-04-2011, 05:54 PM
  4. To protect or not to protect is the question ?
    By aedubber in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-12-2011, 11:03 AM
  5. Rim of the Valley - Resource Study
    By XRC800 in forum California - Socal
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-24-2011, 04:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •