Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    long live long rides
    Reputation: esf_mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    166

    Flagstaff Elks Lodge

    There is a new fence across the Elks Lodge trail at the the Lockett Ranches subdivision (bottom of the red triangle). It wasn't there last weekend, but I saw it yesterday. . . although somebody has already cut it.

    I don't know the full history of this little trail, just wanted to let folks know that you might end up in a confrontation with the landowner, who's suddenly decided to start caring about trail users.


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    i came to the fence, still intact last tuesday morning. it was pretty easy to go through, which i did reluctantly because i thought that someone might be watching if they took the time and effort to put up a new fence. I went back on saturday, and someone had cut it. I knew that it wouldn't take long for that to happen, although that was a particularly fast turnaround.

    i live in the neighborhood adjacent to the elks lodge and ride this trail on almost every ride that i do. i have never had any run-ins with anyone wielding power over this property. has anyone else? the trail was well established when i moved here, so i am far from knowing its complete history, but i have never heard of anyone getting into any sort of trouble for riding/running/walking it. for a while i thought that they had the no trespassing signs to absolve themselves of any insurance liability and otherwise turned a blind eye to use. i guess that's not the case. i would really like to know if anyone has been confronted for trespassing on trespass.

  3. #3
    long live long rides
    Reputation: esf_mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    166
    I've never heard of anyone getting into trouble there, either, and regularly see other bikers, runners, dog walkers, and families. I've been using that trail for quite some time so I hope the situation with the owner hasn't changed. It's definitely a super convenient trail for us NOHO residents.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Noho love!

  5. #5
    banned
    Reputation: The Prodigal Son's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    860
    That use to be such a fun trail to come home on. We'd race back to the Elks Lodge.

    In 1996, when we had the opportunity to vote and designate the now developed land to the west of Buffalo Park as an addition to Buffalo Park, making it 3-4 times larger. We lost that vote by 1/2 a percent. The developer then said to hell with all the talk of user groups wanting to save the land from development. He quickly sold parcels and some people quickly put up no tresspassing signs and also fencing. The County sent it's Trail Coordinator into the area to negociate easements on each of the properties where the trail ran. She was ill-prepared to negociate any deals and could have easily offered a few thousand dollars to get a deal done, but never made that type of cash offer.

    For a short time, trail users cut the fence where those old no tresspassing signs are. It made owners mad but they eventually gave up on blocking that opening in the fence we all stil use. Plus, the economy went south and several lots were never built on, so owners were unaware or didn't care about who rode through. The one property owner next to the areas paved entrance road, near the dead-end gravel road, put up that big fence, covering the trail. He did some more work to cover the area and force riders onto that gravel road. Home owners along Elden Lookout Road have been cool about riders going through their property all along.

    This could be the beginning of the end for us. If the land owner gets serious, the last hope might be to run a new trail from the last fence opening, making a left turn towards Buffalo Park property, and connect to the perimeter trail in the park. Even then, from the paved road to that fence opening, you have to pass no tresspassing signs that may also be enforced one day.

    I cant believe people voted for this to happen.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,862
    Quote Originally Posted by The Prodigal Son View Post
    That use to be such a fun trail to come home on. We'd race back to the Elks Lodge.

    In 1996, when we had the opportunity to vote and designate the now developed land to the west of Buffalo Park as an addition to Buffalo Park, making it 3-4 times larger. We lost that vote by 1/2 a percent. The developer then said to hell with all the talk of user groups wanting to save the land from development. He quickly sold parcels and some people quickly put up no tresspassing signs and also fencing. The County sent it's Trail Coordinator into the area to negociate easements on each of the properties where the trail ran. She was ill-prepared to negociate any deals and could have easily offered a few thousand dollars to get a deal done, but never made that type of cash offer.

    For a short time, trail users cut the fence where those old no tresspassing signs are. It made owners mad but they eventually gave up on blocking that opening in the fence we all stil use. Plus, the economy went south and several lots were never built on, so owners were unaware or didn't care about who rode through. The one property owner next to the areas paved entrance road, near the dead-end gravel road, put up that big fence, covering the trail. He did some more work to cover the area and force riders onto that gravel road. Home owners along Elden Lookout Road have been cool about riders going through their property all along.

    This could be the beginning of the end for us. If the land owner gets serious, the last hope might be to run a new trail from the last fence opening, making a left turn towards Buffalo Park property, and connect to the perimeter trail in the park. Even then, from the paved road to that fence opening, you have to pass no tresspassing signs that may also be enforced one day.

    I cant believe people voted for this to happen.
    True enough but the City blew it by bundling the Lockett Trust land with the 4th street overpass. And if it had passed it wouldn't have been split into parcels but rather a bypass rd to ease the congestion on 180/Fort Valley Rd past Sechrist School.

    It's ironic that the big picture in city hall with the Peaks and the pond/meadow was taken just pass the fence.

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation: The Prodigal Son's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    True enough but the City blew it by bundling the Lockett Trust land with the 4th street overpass. And if it had passed it wouldn't have been split into parcels but rather a bypass rd to ease the congestion on 180/Fort Valley Rd past Sechrist School.

    It's ironic that the big picture in city hall with the Peaks and the pond/meadow was taken just pass the fence.
    I figured everyone supported the 4th street overpass. The new bypass road would have continued Enterprise up over the mesa and allowed some of the turons and RVers enroute to the Grand Canyon to get there quicker and avoid clogging downtown streets. What wasn't to like? Now, during the summer, I have to drive down Humphreys to get to the west side and get behind four blocks of lost tourists wanting to stop and buy a Route 66 t-shirt before heading to Disneyland.

    What about routing the old trail from the pond up to Buffalo Park? It might require buying off one or two landowners for the easement. Seems doable.

  8. #8
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,710
    Fence was up midday sat.
    I dig dirt!

  9. #9
    long live long rides
    Reputation: esf_mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaFred View Post
    Fence was up midday sat.
    I rode on Sunday and it was cut, so that answers that question, not that it matters.

    I guess the three explanations are:
    1) the landowner is just going through a phase,
    2) the landowner had a total change in heart and is serious about keeping people off, or
    3) the parcel has recently been sold and will actually be developed.

    Let's hope it's #1. Thanks for the history about the subdivision process. What about the actual trail though? From what I've heard it's gone back and forth being fenced/closed.

  10. #10
    No mames guey
    Reputation: tpvet73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by esf_mtb View Post
    I rode on Sunday and it was cut, so that answers that question, not that it matters.

    I guess the three explanations are:
    1) the landowner is just going through a phase,
    2) the landowner had a total change in heart and is serious about keeping people off, or
    3) the parcel has recently been sold and will actually be developed.

    Let's hope it's #1. Thanks for the history about the subdivision process. What about the actual trail though? From what I've heard it's gone back and forth being fenced/closed.
    The fence has been up and down many, many times over the years. Back in the olden days circa 1990, you would have to duck up to 3 different fences (1 south of Quintana, and 2 north of Quintana). The sad reality is that this trail cuts across the private property of at least 5 different owners that may not public access as their highest priority. As a frequent user I too hope the fence builder was just going through a phase, but I am pessimistic. Fortunately there are other alternatives to reach the same spot from NoHo (trail from Mesa Dr. down to Sechrist, then back up through The Peaks to the Y).

  11. #11
    slower than you
    Reputation: rockychrysler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    765
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    True enough but the City blew it by bundling the Lockett Trust land with the 4th street overpass. And if it had passed it wouldn't have been split into parcels but rather a bypass rd to ease the congestion on 180/Fort Valley Rd past Sechrist School.

    It's ironic that the big picture in city hall with the Peaks and the pond/meadow was taken just pass the fence.
    i believe there was some indication (solop did some post-polling, iirc) after that election that it was the inclusion of the bypass road behind buffalo park that did that initiative in... still a proposal that sends chills down my spine. nevertheless, most voters were in favor of the other projects... twas the bundle what killed the preservation of lockett trust as greenspace. its was a stupid over-reach by the bureaucrats at city hall. one for which we will now forever be paying the piper.
    "Let our people travel light and free on their bicycles." Ed Abbey
    http://www.rockychrysler.com/

Similar Threads

  1. any snow on Two Elks?
    By jcospoco in forum Colorado - Western Slope
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-02-2009, 10:57 AM
  2. West Elks and credit cards.
    By mikesee in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-24-2009, 04:07 PM
  3. Two Elks, Commando trail conditions?
    By PuraVida in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-27-2008, 04:41 PM
  4. Two Elks, Commando trail conditions?
    By PuraVida in forum Colorado - Western Slope
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2008, 08:23 AM
  5. Little Vail Help? Two Elks Trail?
    By PDB in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-15-2007, 02:21 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
  •