Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 175
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!

    I opened my email yesterday and found this message from Patrick Kell, I.M.B.A.'s Southwest Regional Rep:

    Hello, I hope this email finds you well. I'm contacting you to let you know that the Sedona Mountain Bike Club (SMBC) will no longer be part of the IMBA chapter program, we have given the SMBC Board 60 days notice of this action. This action has been taken due to the fact that IMBA and some members of the SMBC Board have divergent approaches to many of the fundamental components of mountain bike advocacy, and IMBA cannot align with the style of advocacy that some SMBC Board members are putting forth.

    We sincerely thank you for your support and hope that you can continue to support IMBA in the future, your current IMBA membership is still active. Should we re-establish an IMBA chapter in Sedona, we would welcome your renewed membership. Until then, we plan to work cooperatively with the Verde Valley Cyclist Coalition, as a leading advocacy group, the USFS at the Red Rock Ranger District as strong partners on a local, regional and national level, and other groups, agencies and individuals in the area. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts and feedback on this, please feel free to email or call at the number below.

    Thanks,
    Patrick

    Patrick Kell
    Southwest Regional Director
    International Mountain Bicycling Association
    802-371-9033
    patrick.kell@imba.com
    International Mountain Bicycling Association

    Of course, the main reason that I joined I.M.B.A. was that the Sedona Mountain Bike Club had become an I.M.B.A. Chapter. I never joined the Verde Valley Cyclist's Coalition, even though I had plenty of opportunity to do so for over ten years. And I did not join I.M.B.A. prior to the formation of the Sedona Mountain Bike Club, even though I.M.B.A. has been around for at least two decades.

    So, I have requested that my membership fees be refunded in full, as it appears as if I.M.B.A. officials had already made up their minds to give the Sedona Mountain Bike Club the boot even before I joined, and that seems to me like I.M.B.A. accepted my membership fees under false pretenses.

    This is incredibly lame of I.M.B.A. and I will be encouraging ALL of the other 80 or so Sedona Mountain Bike Club members to follow suit...
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  2. #2
    Lakvoodoo
    Reputation: Lakvoodoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    80
    Let's clarify... "Sedona" per se was not asked to step away from IMBA; rather, the SMBC was. The VVCC (which is a coalition of all types of riders throughout the Verde Valley to include Sedona) still has a good working relationship with IMBA as does the forest service.

    Full-disclosure: I am a member of both clubs as well as a long-time member of IMBA.

    Club or no club...it's all about moving forward. Out of curiosity, what did you expect from joining a club? Funding? Social beni's? Other? Social ties can (and will and should) continue. The money you put toward SMBC...what did you expect to get from that? If you were the local trail overlord, what would you want to see happen? And why?

    Happy trails...
    .
    Get Outside!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JChasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    344
    You guys sure have a lot MTB of drama down there.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,906
    Well, not really surprising news given how Patrick had already distanced himself from the Sedona chapter and "appeared" to be working more closely with VVVC.

    This has been posted before but it's a pretty good, unbiased overview of the scene. Sedrama - Growing Pains in Sedona - Pinkbike

  5. #5
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,208
    The Sedona Mountain Bike Club would seem to be the predominant club, but perhaps the Verde Valley cyclists are interested in building level sustainable trails for horses?
    "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.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!

    Shucks.
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    Your action of requesting a refund on your membership and telling everybody else to do the same is a prime example of what I assume IMBA (and the USFS) didn't want to deal with anymore. No offense, but a select few members of SMBC have feared change and haven't been afraid to let it be known. I wonder how much harm SMBC has done to local biking compared to how much good they have done...

    Maybe Patrick could shed a little light on this, but I heard that an affiliate club (Like VVCC) gets to keep more of the money they raise locally while a chapter club (Like SMBC) has to give more of the money they raise to IMBA to be distributed elsewhere. Again, this is just something rumored in another forum.

    But please don't get your panties in a wad because I haven't been a member of either VVCC or SMBC.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  8. #8
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Dean - no we absolutely did not accept your dues having already made a decision, that would be unethical and it's not how I or IMBA operate. That sounds like another Sedona conspiracy theory to me. The final decision was made very recently. Like I said, i'll consult with a co-worker regarding a refund and will get back to you.

  9. #9
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by woahey View Post
    Your action of requesting a refund on your membership and telling everybody else to do the same is a prime example of what I assume IMBA (and the USFS) didn't want to deal with anymore. No offense, but a select few members of SMBC have feared change and haven't been afraid to let it be known. I wonder how much harm SMBC has done to local biking compared to how much good they have done...

    Maybe Patrick could shed a little light on this, but I heard that an affiliate club (Like VVCC) gets to keep more of the money they raise locally while a chapter club (Like SMBC) has to give more of the money they raise to IMBA to be distributed elsewhere. Again, this is just something rumored in another forum.

    But please don't get your panties in a wad because I haven't been a member of either VVCC or SMBC.
    Thanks for the common sense Woahey

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418
    The Verde Valley Cycling Coalition is mostly a roadie oriented entity and even most of the V.V.C.C. members who identify themselves as being "mountain bikers" are really just road riders on dirt, while the Sedona Mountain Biking Club consists mostly of hardcore, technical riders and also includes in its membership many of the original Sedona residents who are responsible for riding many of the routes into existence that are now the "famous" trails that people come from all around the World to ride. Without these original Sedona mountain biking pioneers, there wouldn't even be 1/4 of the trails here, and there would not even be enough of a Sedona mountain biking scene for us to even be having a discussion on this forum about Sedona trails and Sedona mountain biking politics.

    And, if it was not for the vision and dedication of the original Sedona mountain biking pioneers, who are the core of the S.M.B.C, I would have probably moved to Boulder City, Nevada or Whistler, British Columbia when I left Zion; so I am super grateful for all of the hard work they have done over the past few decades and all of the challenges that they have faced.

    To me, it is totally chicken$hit of I.M.B.A. to abandon the S.M.B.C; mostly over a disagreement over whether a petition opposing the recent illegal trail closures instituted by the Forest Circus included enough or accurate enough information. It is not the job of ANY petition to fully articulate the opposition's viewpoint, and the Forest Circus certainly presented extremely selective/biased/inaccurate info when they held their meeting announcing that they were "thinking of" (read that "had already decided to") implement their "mountain biking cross-country travel ban".

    In fact just the wording, "cross-country travel ban" is extremely and intentionally mis-leading in my estimation; since it is really a "trail closure", more than anything else. All that the petition pointed out, was that the closure ONLY targeted mountain bikers, not hikers, trail runners, equestrians, climbers, etc; and was therefore discriminatory.
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418
    Patrick,

    I spoke with Dave Cichan yesterday after he read my original post here; and he informed me that he has a copy of a recording of a phone conversation between you and Rama, which validates my belief that you and/or IMBA had already made the decision to pull the SMBC's charter BEFORE I joined the SMBC, but had just not made the official announcement. Speaking directly with Rama further confirmed my suspicions.

    It is also interesting that after certain Forest Service employees told you that they did not wish to work with the SMBC, that you used that as partial justification to revoke the SMBC's charter, rather than having the balls to tell the Forest Service that you had over 70 members in a local club who are willing, able, and knowledgeable, and that they would need to find a way to incorporate these volunteers into their plans, in order to gain some trust and cooperation. Perhaps you need to grow a pair!
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GTscoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,328
    Bike Doc, no offense meant but it seems like if your life is constantly filled with MTB drama it might not be the fault of everyone else around you.

  13. #13
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Dean, i've been thinking about it for a long time, there is no doubt about that, and have gone back and forth in my own mind about it. As I have said several times, I didn't make the final decision until very recently.

  14. #14
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    IMBA is only partially representative of mountain biking, and they are extremely political. Every organization is, but being a bike organization its easy to forget that they are not necessarily on your side. IMBA is concerned with IMBA's platform and priorities - flat trails, lame grades, beginner-intermediate difficulty, brown-nosing whatever powers-that-be in the interests of 'promoting' mountain biking. I can ride my bike just fine without a bunch of whiny apologists, thank you. Maybe they saw 'progress' and 'change' as good...the 'answers' with Sedona imo lie somewhere between the dorks at IMBA and actual real mountain bikers. But what is DISGUSTING about IMBA they use their title and pulpit to bully, this is a perfect example. If you are not with the dirt roadies, you are against them. They obtain power by reacharound agreements with Land Managers where they purport to represent mtbrs, but they only represent 1 slice of us. I will never join IMBA. If you don't like how they want to denude you as a mtbr, speak out that they do not represent you. Let them all go ride multi-use paths with the Sierra Club. I hope they keep their boring, lame ideas out of K-trail. BCT is fun, but its just a decent trail. GO AWAY IMBA, Pemberton is calling.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    I typed a half serious, half smartassed response and wound up deleting it in an effort to show some tact. All I really can say is this: If the SMBC is such a great club what SMBC members need to do is try to keep it together. The SMBC can still go on without IMBA's backing. Prove that it is an organization that is needed to make Sedona biking better. Make it so that the majority of local bikers support the causes SMBC states are important but do it with honesty and integrity.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  16. #16
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,586
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    IMBA is only partially representative of mountain biking, and they are extremely political. Every organization is, but being a bike organization its easy to forget that they are not necessarily on your side. IMBA is concerned with IMBA's platform and priorities - flat trails, lame grades, beginner-intermediate difficulty, brown-nosing whatever powers-that-be in the interests of 'promoting' mountain biking. I can ride my bike just fine without a bunch of whiny apologists, thank you. Maybe they saw 'progress' and 'change' as good...the 'answers' with Sedona imo lie somewhere between the dorks at IMBA and actual real mountain bikers. But what is DISGUSTING about IMBA they use their title and pulpit to bully, this is a perfect example. If you are not with the dirt roadies, you are against them. They obtain power by reacharound agreements with Land Managers where they purport to represent mtbrs, but they only represent 1 slice of us. I will never join IMBA. If you don't like how they want to denude you as a mtbr, speak out that they do not represent you. Let them all go ride multi-use paths with the Sierra Club. I hope they keep their boring, lame ideas out of K-trail. BCT is fun, but its just a decent trail. GO AWAY IMBA, Pemberton is calling.
    you could have just said they're like union leaders...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    IMBA is only partially representative of mountain biking, and they are extremely political. Every organization is, but being a bike organization its easy to forget that they are not necessarily on your side. IMBA is concerned with IMBA's platform and priorities - flat trails, lame grades, beginner-intermediate difficulty, brown-nosing whatever powers-that-be in the interests of 'promoting' mountain biking. I can ride my bike just fine without a bunch of whiny apologists, thank you. Maybe they saw 'progress' and 'change' as good...the 'answers' with Sedona imo lie somewhere between the dorks at IMBA and actual real mountain bikers. But what is DISGUSTING about IMBA they use their title and pulpit to bully, this is a perfect example. If you are not with the dirt roadies, you are against them. They obtain power by reacharound agreements with Land Managers where they purport to represent mtbrs, but they only represent 1 slice of us. I will never join IMBA. If you don't like how they want to denude you as a mtbr, speak out that they do not represent you. Let them all go ride multi-use paths with the Sierra Club. I hope they keep their boring, lame ideas out of K-trail. BCT is fun, but its just a decent trail. GO AWAY IMBA, Pemberton is calling.
    We seem to go round and round on this, but if IMBA's goal is to promote mountain biking, I'll make the educated assumption that the majority of those who call themselves "mountain bikers" are what you refer to as dirt roadies. I've said it from day 1, but if you want promote more the more aggressive riding aspect of mountain biking, you need the grassroot groups. And you need to keep the discussion private or semi-private. This is why I was so hard on some on this board. Certain folks had a place in mt biking, but using a public forum to promote their agenda was going to bit him in the ass.

    I'm not going even pretend I know the specific issues that led to IMBA kicking out the Sedona group. But I'd venture to say that they did not see eye to eye on how to promote the sport.

    This is just my opinion, and I'm sure plenty disagree.
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  18. #18
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by woahey View Post
    I typed a half serious, half smartassed response and wound up deleting it in an effort to show some tact. All I really can say is this: If the SMBC is such a great club what SMBC members need to do is try to keep it together. The SMBC can still go on without IMBA's backing. Prove that it is an organization that is needed to make Sedona biking better. Make it so that the majority of local bikers support the causes SMBC states are important but do it with honesty and integrity.
    what is wrong with simply riding your bike and speaking out against discrimination? Why does SMBC have TO DO anything? Isnt a couple hundred signatures simply saying ' i like technical rides, I want access to my public spaces' being clear enough? Isnt a group having several dozen volunteers something the FS should seek out, instead of marginalize? Shouldnt a national biking org defer to a local one for local issues? Shouldnt Land Managers, as public employees with a mission to serve the public, be the ones concerned with positive actions and building bridges with the locals rather than discriminating?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    Shouldnt a national biking org defer to a local one for local issues? Shouldnt Land Managers, as public employees with a mission to serve the public, be the ones concerned with positive actions and building bridges with the locals rather than discriminating?
    Isn't that what they are doing by working with the Verde Valley Cyclist Coalition?
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  20. #20
    Always a good day to ride
    Reputation: bik_ryder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    120
    I blame Dale's Maps and the Ricochet trail.

  21. #21
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Observer View Post
    Isn't that what they are doing by working with the Verde Valley Cyclist Coalition?
    yes, but...they are blatanly ignoring many relevant stakeholders in so doing. IMBA is a private entity and can pick its allies, but to then spin that it speaks for the community is laughable. FS owes it to all citizens to incorporate their povs.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206
    Quote Originally Posted by bik_ryder View Post
    I blame Dale's Maps and the Ricochet trail.
    Why do you have to bring race into this discussion?
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  23. #23
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by casual observer View Post
    why do you have to bring race into this discussion?
    lmao!

  24. #24
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    As was posted here earlier IMBA has terminated the Chapter Charter Agreement of the Sedona Mountain Bike Club (SMBC). IMBA blames/justifies the termination on the board of directors of the SMBC for several stated “violations” among them:

    - the Change.org petition
    - conduct relating to the USFS
    - and complaints at the last RTCA meeting

    What is interesting is that the SMBC is a directly democratic organization. We do not act or speak for our membership but transparently follow their wishes. Most recently we asked our membership to vote regarding the change.org petition. Here is how our membership voted:

    77% - Leave the petition in tact
    17% - Dis-associate the SMBC from the petition
    7% - Take the petition down

    When the SMBC's democratic decision making process is taken into account IMBA's stated reasons for Chapter Charter Termination “violations” of our board amount to a lot of Heresay and seem petty and ridiculous.

    So, what is the REAL reason that IMBA terminated the SMBC's Chapter Charter Agreement? There are two: The first is related to the new unwritten conduct a Chapter is expected to follow. Take for instance the South Western Regional Director's territory:

    California
    Nevada
    Utah
    Arizona
    New Mexico

    How is a Regional Director to achieve his or her organizational goals when they are managing five states?!... Well, I'll tell you: That Director most likely is relying on his or her Chapters to follow instructions. I can tell you that having 20+ years worth of issues here in Sedona, our Chapter was not looking for marching orders. Our community had discussed and identified our priorities long before a South Western Regional Director position even existed. Also, there was no discussion of IMBA's agenda/goals prior to Chapter formation or after constitution. I can only guess that our directors goals were at conflict with our own goals from day one as he NEVER illuminated us as to what they were.

    The second reason can be found in the third paragraph of IMBA's termination notice to the SMBC:

    “The petition jeopardizes IMBAs reputation and partnership with the USFS.”

    Basically, by conducting ourselves as a democratic grass roots mountain bike advocacy organization; communicating and standing-up for our members interests, telling the truth, and acting with integrity we angered the USFS and embarrassed IMBA. Given how close IMBA has chosen to work with the USFS our conduct was inexcusable. When it was time to decide how to proceed IMBA sacrificed it's mountain bike members interests to secure it's relationship with the USFS. In doing so IMBA has sent a clear message to it's members about where they stand.

    Which brings me to an important point of clarification: The SMBC (Sedona Trail Stewardship Fund LLC.) did not draft the Change.org petition. Rather, we assisted in the process of drafting and posting the petition. The petition was actually created by a collective of more than 20 local mountain bikers (including input from a member of the VVCC). The SMBC's board had learned that due to the threat of an imminent USFS trail closure a group of riders was considering a much more negative response. We engaged with the collective and lobbied for a more constructive and effective approach. The petition was the product of those discussions.

    The relatively small act of creating the petition made a big difference to many local riders. They saw that we were serious about democratic, grass roots, mountain bike advocacy, and as a result many more riders joined the SMBC. Many who of which had NEVER belonged to a mountain bike advocacy group before.

    Many of the members who chose to join the SMBC happened to be pioneers of the Sedona mountain bike scene; local residents, riders, shop owners, and yes some illegal trail builders... the very people that we desperately needed at the table... people with deep roots, a lot of skin in the game, and a tremendous amount of passion. Having these folks willingly join the SMBC and become part of a public process was a HUGE victory and an important step towards working through the several decades old challenging relationship that had existed between mountain bikers and the USFS.

    However, IMBA has decided that moving forward in a very aggressive way is more important... In my opinion they are also seeking to re-brand mountain bike advocacy... to IMBA... They intend to OWN it. Everyone who spends time on this site understands there is more than one way to skin a cat. Any organization that seeks a monopoly is expecting the public to accept an incredibly dangerous precedent. Consider the words of professor Eben Moglen:

    “Sharing is how knowledge grows, 'Owning' is how knowledge shrinks.”

    IMBA needs to realize that the future of mountain bike advocacy is not top-down coercion but bottom-up, grass roots, 'crowd sourced' solutions and free community driven knowledge bases.

    From what I can see Sedona has become a significant part of IMBA's campaign to convince the mountain biking public that they are important/relevant. As an example IMBA has plans to hold it's World Summit in Sedona in 2014. The irony is that IMBA would not even be considering Sedona for their World Summit without the work of many of our members (Sedona's mountain bike pioneers)... who IMBA has just completely disrespected!

    One last thought: Metcalfe's law – is based on telecommunications networks but can be applied to human networks. It states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). When applied to the larger mountain bike community, our network becomes stronger when we 'include' more mountain bikers. So how does IMBA figure that alienating 70 of it's newest members is “strong mountain bike advocacy leadership”? Maybe it's time for change?

    The Sedona Mountain Bike Club rides on. We will continue to ride together, participate in democratic grass roots mountain bike advocacy, and seek to engage the USFS in a mutually beneficial and respectful relationship.

    CB
    Last edited by CANADIANBACON; 07-13-2013 at 12:28 PM.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tysonnemb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,090
    Why does something so fun and great have to have politics involved?
    “Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world.”
-Grant Petersen

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tomfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    142
    Politics in general, "They" the players start out with the best intentions and then over time realize that the only way to move forward is to assimilate and become generic. Pretty soon everything becomes flat, paved, and un-agressive. I don't know anything about this political drama, but I gotta say canadianbacon's post is pretty well thought out well articulated. It speaks directly to someone like me that is a core aggressive ex MX riding advocate, that just see's the establishment closing trails all over the country, and disguises it by saying "here you go these trails are made of dirt you should be happy"...............Keeping in mind though that the illegal trail builders and downhill bombers running hikers and horses off trails do ruin it for the rest of us, there needs to be rules, and the by nature the aggressive tend to be anarchists that really are not for rules.......here lies the problem...............ok back to your regularly scheduled political battle.........LOL!

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    242
    As a national advocacy group that must cooperate with various government agencies and cultivate a favorable public image, the IMBA predictably follows a "go along to get along" approach. Anything perceived as too aggressive or not sufficiently cooperative with land managers makes them nervous and hesitant.

    This may be an OK strategy for getting more people into the sport and making nice with the USFS. But I can tell you for certain that this approach will primarily get us double wide, mildly graded, mulit-use trails. Not exactly what many serious riders are craving.

    In my perfect world, the IMBA would be more aggressive and not be shy about using the same hardball tactics the SC and other anti-access groups have been beating us with for decades. MTB has favorable numbers and demographics. Screw being nice and break out the bats and chains more often.

    But that is not how the IMBA sees things.

    I can see the logic in supporting both the IMBA and groups like those in Sedona who choose to be more aggressive in protecting their trails and access. On the whole, MTB as a cause is better for having both.

    Personally, I am 100% in the more aggressive camp. Playing nice with the anti-access crowd is a losers game and the land manager govt bureaucrats always follow the path of least pain or resistance. You can be aggressive without surrendering the moral high ground.

    R

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: azjonboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by tysonnemb View Post
    Why does something so fun and great have to have politics involved?
    Because IMBA is first and foremost a political entity. Representing LOCAL groups and riders is not even secondary. It's way down their list.
    If you're lucky enough to be in the mountains,
    you're lucky enough.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    IMBA is only partially representative of mountain biking, and they are extremely political. Every organization is, but being a bike organization its easy to forget that they are not necessarily on your side. IMBA is concerned with IMBA's platform and priorities - flat trails, lame grades, beginner-intermediate difficulty, brown-nosing whatever powers-that-be in the interests of 'promoting' mountain biking. I can ride my bike just fine without a bunch of whiny apologists, thank you. Maybe they saw 'progress' and 'change' as good...the 'answers' with Sedona imo lie somewhere between the dorks at IMBA and actual real mountain bikers. But what is DISGUSTING about IMBA they use their title and pulpit to bully, this is a perfect example. If you are not with the dirt roadies, you are against them. They obtain power by reacharound agreements with Land Managers where they purport to represent mtbrs, but they only represent 1 slice of us. I will never join IMBA. If you don't like how they want to denude you as a mtbr, speak out that they do not represent you. Let them all go ride multi-use paths with the Sierra Club. I hope they keep their boring, lame ideas out of K-trail. BCT is fun, but its just a decent trail. GO AWAY IMBA, Pemberton is calling.
    IMBA can go to hell, spodes and pu$$ies use their worthless trial building doctrine as justification to sanitize otherwise good trails.

    PMP is a fine example. If you think you're good because you can ride everything there, think again. It was at least 30% more technical ~2001. Today it's just faster, and therefore more dangerous for spodes, hikers, and glue stick lovers.

    (I)diots (M)orons (B)itches (A)$$holes
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,851
    I went out and had a blast on my bike today and it was no where near Sedona. Just sayin'
    Vassago Cycles, Shadetree Bikes, Flat Tire Bikes, Galfer Brakes USA

  31. #31
    Lakvoodoo
    Reputation: Lakvoodoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    80
    Here's a thought: have you ever approached the VVCC to work toward your objectives? Maybe worth a try. After all, the infrastructure is already established, the ear of the FS is already attainable, there's a decent mix of MTB (XC, DH, enduro,...), road, muni, etc..

    For most of us in the VV, it's not about politics nor money nor being a member of a "club" or labeled one type of rider or another.....everybody just wants to ride. No one discounts any of the incredible mtb history here, in fact, most of us appreciate and respect the heck out of it! Props!

    Now... It's those of you who present yourselves as so "counter-culture", yet you establish an organization to be part of a "culture". Yet in the big picture, it's fracturing a community which should be pretty tight knit. Compared to other issues in this world right now, this all seems so friggin petty. So back to my original query....pass on some of your interests to the VVCC. Better yet, get involved. Represent. You don't even have to wear spandex. :-)




    Quote Originally Posted by Bike Doc View Post
    The Verde Valley Cycling Coalition is mostly a roadie oriented entity and even most of the V.V.C.C. members who identify themselves as being "mountain bikers" are really just road riders on dirt, while the Sedona Mountain Biking Club consists mostly of hardcore, technical riders and also includes in its membership many of the original Sedona residents who are responsible for riding many of the routes into existence that are now the "famous" trails that people come from all around the World to ride. Without these original Sedona mountain biking pioneers, there wouldn't even be 1/4 of the trails here, and there would not even be enough of a Sedona mountain biking scene for us to even be having a discussion on this forum about Sedona trails and Sedona mountain biking politics.

    And, if it was not for the vision and dedication of the original Sedona mountain biking pioneers, who are the core of the S.M.B.C, I would have probably moved to Boulder City, Nevada or Whistler, British Columbia when I left Zion; so I am super grateful for all of the hard work they have done over the past few decades and all of the challenges that they have faced.

    To me, it is totally chicken$hit of I.M.B.A. to abandon the S.M.B.C; mostly over a disagreement over whether a petition opposing the recent illegal trail closures instituted by the Forest Circus included enough or accurate enough information. It is not the job of ANY petition to fully articulate the opposition's viewpoint, and the Forest Circus certainly presented extremely selective/biased/inaccurate info when they held their meeting announcing that they were "thinking of" (read that "had already decided to") implement their "mountain biking cross-country travel ban".

    In fact just the wording, "cross-country travel ban" is extremely and intentionally mis-leading in my estimation; since it is really a "trail closure", more than anything else. All that the petition pointed out, was that the closure ONLY targeted mountain bikers, not hikers, trail runners, equestrians, climbers, etc; and was therefore discriminatory.
    .
    Get Outside!

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418

    Conspiracy Theory???

    [QUOTE=IMBA south west;10527656]Dean - That sounds like another Sedona conspiracy theory to me.QUOTE]

    I spoke with Patrick Kell yesterday and he informed me that I.M.B.A. was currently working with the Red Rock Ranger District of the Forest Service to bring the non-system trails known as the hogs (Hog Heaven, High on the Hog, Hog Wash and Hogaliscious) into the system and made "official". He then went on to tell me that I.M.B.A. and the Forest Service had conspired to keep the Sedona Mountain Bike Club out of the discussion, as it was assumed by them that the S.M.B.C. would F things up.

    He went on to further inform me that there were also talks going on between the Forest Service and I.M.B.A. to bring "Western Civilization" and "Last Frontier" into the system, and that also in that instance, they had conspired to not invite the S.M.B.C. to the table and to try instead to keep them in the dark.

    After that, Patrick informed me that there were discussions going on between I.M.B.A. and the Forest Service about holding the 2014 I.M.B.A. World Summit in Sedona, to show off all of the amazing trails here which had been built without authorization and had since been adopted by the Forest Service; and that once again, the two parties had conspired to keep the S.M.B.C. away from the table and out of the discussion; even though many of those trails may have been originally created by members of the S.M.B.C!

    Somehow, he was able to ignore the sheer hypocrisy of his position.

    I had heard that Ireland had the highest rate of mental illness of any country in the World, and trying to have logical conversations with this man makes me think that what I have heard may well be true...
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  33. #33
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Not entirely accurate Dean, but yes it is another of your conspiracy
    theories. Here are the facts. VVCC and USFS have applied for a grant
    to do some work on Hogs, IMBA have provided $2,500 towards the
    project. Regarding Western Civ and Last Frontier, I had a very
    informal conversation with some folks this week about that and will
    likely follow up on it later this summer. Regarding the World Summit,
    we would ride the legal trails, which were likely built by some SMBC
    members before SMBC came into being, there is no question about that.

    None of these conversations were me conspiring, it's simply a matter that the SMBC board don't get asked to participate, it's not my fault that the many great SMBC members are so poorly represented by most of their board. If I were a member I would ask the board why they are not brought into these conversation. Regarding your Ireland comment, there really is no need to bring other peoples personal illnesses into the conversation, that's quite unkind.

    [QUOTE=Bike Doc;10531495]
    Quote Originally Posted by IMBA south west View Post
    Dean - That sounds like another Sedona conspiracy theory to me.QUOTE]

    I spoke with Patrick Kell yesterday and he informed me that I.M.B.A. was currently working with the Red Rock Ranger District of the Forest Service to bring the non-system trails known as the hogs (Hog Heaven, High on the Hog, Hog Wash and Hogaliscious) into the system and made "official". He then went on to tell me that I.M.B.A. and the Forest Service had conspired to keep the Sedona Mountain Bike Club out of the discussion, as it was assumed by them that the S.M.B.C. would F things up.

    He went on to further inform me that there were also talks going on between the Forest Service and I.M.B.A. to bring "Western Civilization" and "Last Frontier" into the system, and that also in that instance, they had conspired to not invite the S.M.B.C. to the table and to try instead to keep them in the dark.

    After that, Patrick informed me that there were discussions going on between I.M.B.A. and the Forest Service about holding the 2014 I.M.B.A. World Summit in Sedona, to show off all of the amazing trails here which had been built without authorization and had since been adopted by the Forest Service; and that once again, the two parties had conspired to keep the S.M.B.C. away from the table and out of the discussion; even though many of those trails may have been originally created by members of the S.M.B.C!

    Somehow, he was able to ignore the sheer hypocrisy of his position.

    I had heard that Ireland had the highest rate of mental illness of any country in the World, and trying to have logical conversations with this man makes me think that what I have heard may well be true...

  34. #34
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,820
    Red Rock Drama Queens will never let up. I can't wait for the Real House Wife's of Sedrama to air on A&E....

  35. #35
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Dave, some of what you say is correct, much of it is not. Correct that some of the current members of SMBC are the pioneers, that is not in question. Sedona Trail Stewardship Fund is a DBA for SMBC. Strange that some members that I spoke to this week didn't know that? They also didn't know about any of the positive developments in Sedona, again it's strange that they didn't know any of those things. You didn't poll your membership in a democratic manner before posting the petition in their name, you haven't told them who will be representing them when it gets to D.C., so why talk about democracy and transparency when asked to remove it? You were not democratic about it in the first place. You're bluffing and clutching at straws, and it shows. I've had the full range of responses from the community on this matter including folks being upset and calling me a fascist on one end of the scale to the other end, which has included comments such as "thanks", "you rock", "stoked", "I, like many members agree with IMBA's style of advocacy, rather than that of those board members", "I'm seriously thinking of ending my SMBC membership", I will change my IMBA chapter to XYZ Chapter", "By this action I believe that IMBA is clearly showing their support for the use of positive collaboration related to mountain biking on public lands".

    I'll likely reserve a meeting room in Sedona over the next few weeks in order to continue this conversation in person with any members who wish to participate. You know that I don't hide or shy away from these matters.

    Also to use terms such as 'expected to follow orders' is totally incorrect. Typing the word 'REAL' in caps, also does not make something real. I'm fully aware that I have not gotten involved in any substantive projects with SMBC and the reason is the almost continual stream of paranoid conspiratorial nonsense perpetuated by a few folks, which gets in the way of being able to get stuck into the projects. The SMBC membership are an awesome group of people, but unfortunately they are represented by several local folks who have ensured that they are excluded from advocacy matters, and therein lies the irony. They deserve much better, they deserve to be represented by people whose opinion is sought out, not by people who get ignored. Should the membership wish to continue with their current leaders representing them, that's fine. We don't expect people to follow orders, but we do expect our local ambassadors to at least have the ability to get invited to the table. The SMBC board don't get asked to participate, and that responsibility sits on your shoulders due to the poor representation that you provide for your constituents. Stop bluffing and blaming others for your lack of leadership and the situation that you have created.

    Quote Originally Posted by CANADIANBACON View Post
    As was posted here earlier IMBA has terminated the Chapter Charter Agreement of the Sedona Mountain Bike Club (SMBC). IMBA blames/justifies the termination on the board of directors of the SMBC for several stated “violations” among them:

    - the Change.org petition
    - conduct relating to the USFS
    - and complaints at the last RTCA meeting

    What is interesting is that the SMBC is a directly democratic organization. We do not act or speak for our membership but transparently follow their wishes. Most recently we asked our membership to vote regarding the change.org petition. Here is how our membership voted:

    77% - Leave the petition in tact
    17% - Dis-associate the SMBC from the petition
    7% - Take the petition down

    When the SMBC's democratic decision making process is taken into account IMBA's stated reasons for Chapter Charter Termination “violations” of our board amount to a lot of Heresay and seem petty and ridiculous.

    So, what is the REAL reason that IMBA terminated the SMBC's Chapter Charter Agreement? There are two: The first is related to the new unwritten conduct a Chapter is expected to follow. Take for instance the South Western Regional Director's territory:

    California
    Nevada
    Utah
    Arizona
    New Mexico

    How is a Regional Director to achieve his or her organizational goals when they are managing five states?!... Well, I'll tell you: That Director most likely is relying on his or her Chapters to follow instructions. I can tell you that having 20+ years worth of issues here in Sedona, our Chapter was not looking for marching orders. Our community had discussed and identified our priorities long before a South Western Regional Director position even existed. Also, there was no discussion of IMBA's agenda/goals prior to Chapter formation or after constitution. I can only guess that our directors goals were at conflict with our own goals from day one as he NEVER illuminated us as to what they were.

    The second reason can be found in the third paragraph of IMBA's termination notice to the SMBC:

    “The petition jeopardizes IMBAs reputation and partnership with the USFS.”

    Basically, by conducting ourselves as a democratic grass roots mountain bike advocacy organization; communicating and standing-up for our members interests, telling the truth, and acting with integrity we angered the USFS and embarrassed IMBA. Given how close IMBA has chosen to work with the USFS our conduct was inexcusable. When it was time to decide how to proceed IMBA sacrificed it's mountain bike members interests to secure it's relationship with the USFS. In doing so IMBA has sent a clear message to it's members about where they stand.

    Which brings me to an important point of clarification: The SMBC (Sedona Trail Stewardship Fund LLC.) did not draft the Change.org petition. Rather, we assisted in the process of drafting and posting the petition. The petition was actually created by a collective of more than 20 local mountain bikers (including input from a member of the VVCC). The SMBC's board had learned that due to the threat of an imminent USFS trail closure a group of riders was considering a much more negative response. We engaged with the collective and lobbied for a more constructive and effective approach. The petition was the product of those discussions.

    The relatively small act of creating the petition made a big difference to many local riders. They saw that we were serious about democratic, grass roots, mountain bike advocacy, and as a result many more riders joined the SMBC. Many who of which had NEVER belonged to a mountain bike advocacy group before.

    Many of the members who chose to join the SMBC happened to be pioneers of the Sedona mountain bike scene; local residents, riders, shop owners, and yes some illegal trail builders... the very people that we desperately needed at the table... people with deep roots, a lot of skin in the game, and a tremendous amount of passion. Having these folks willingly join the SMBC and become part of a public process was a HUGE victory and an important step towards working through the several decades old challenging relationship that had existed between mountain bikers and the USFS.

    However, IMBA has decided that moving forward in a very aggressive way is more important... In my opinion they are also seeking to re-brand mountain bike advocacy... to IMBA... They intend to OWN it. Everyone who spends time on this site understands there is more than one way to skin a cat. Any organization that seeks a monopoly is expecting the public to accept an incredibly dangerous precedent. Consider the words of professor Eben Moglen:

    “Sharing is how knowledge grows, 'Owning' is how knowledge shrinks.”

    IMBA needs to realize that the future of mountain bike advocacy is not top-down coercion but bottom-up, grass roots, 'crowd sourced' solutions and free community driven knowledge bases.

    From what I can see Sedona has become a significant part of IMBA's campaign to convince the mountain biking public that they are important/relevant. As an example IMBA has plans to hold it's World Summit in Sedona in 2014. The irony is that IMBA would not even be considering Sedona for their World Summit without the work of many of our members (Sedona's mountain bike pioneers)... who IMBA has just completely disrespected!

    One last thought: Metcalfe's law – is based on telecommunications networks but can be applied to human networks. It states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). When applied to the larger mountain bike community, our network becomes stronger when we 'include' more mountain bikers. So how does IMBA figure that alienating 70 of it's newest members is “strong mountain bike advocacy leadership”? Maybe it's time for change?

    The Sedona Mountain Bike Club rides on. We will continue to ride together, participate in democratic grass roots mountain bike advocacy, and seek to engage the USFS in a mutually beneficial and respectful relationship.

    CB

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by cstem View Post
    I went out and had a blast on my bike today and it was no where near Sedona. Just sayin'
    +1 ^

  37. #37
    dirt visionary
    Reputation: clockwork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,410
    I once slept at a holiday Inn but today I was deep in the forest smelling wet pines and enjoying hero dirt.
    Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
    arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body.

  38. #38
    The .05 percent
    Reputation: sinatorj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    777
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    Red Rock Drama Queens will never let up. I can't wait for the Real House Wife's of Sedrama to air on A&E....
    now that s@&t is funny
    Make Flagstaff RAD Again.

  39. #39
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    So, I am to believe that the SMBC's acting board (of volunteers) is utterly poor in performing their duties from the Southwestern Regional Director of IMBA who is ranting on mtbr?! That is rich.

    Contrary to the attacks, and Heresay, the facts tell a different story; that the SMBC board has performed their basic duties excellently.

    One thing has become very clear throughout this entire experience. IMBA's Southwestern Regional Director feels that he is right and any dissenting voice is wrong and a “conspiracy theorist”. I beg to differ. I thought I had seen it all but this is a first, I am witnessing someone intent on playing mountain bike advocacy GOD.

    What is certain is that IMBA's Southwestern Regional Director abused his influence and role by positioning himself as barrier between the SMBC and entities such as the USFS and holding back important information. This is why the SMBC board and our our “awesome” club members were excluded from participating in advocacy projects with the USFS and “ignored” and not “invited to the table”. By design.

    As far as I am concerned we DO deserve better. I hope IMBA is listening.

    CB

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DJ Giggity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,234
    I'm a long time IMBA member and definitely not an IMBA hater. This really seems like IMBA is throwing the local club under the bus because it is politically expedient. Patrick's comments in this tread smack of arrogance. Can you really call yourself a grassroots organization when you are shutting out local voices?
    Only two infinite things exist: the universe and stupidity. And, I am unsure of the universe
    - Albert Einstein

  41. #41
    IMBA south west
    Guest
    Dave, i'm not going to get into this any further with you on here, due to the mis-inperpretation of my words, for one reason or another. As I said, I plan to reserve a meeting room and all interested parties can come along and voice their opinions and ask questions. I'll let you know a date once I have one.

    Off to ride Flagstaff. Later.

    Quote Originally Posted by CANADIANBACON View Post
    So, I am to believe that the SMBC's acting board (of volunteers) is utterly poor in performing their duties from the Southwestern Regional Director of IMBA who is ranting on mtbr?! That is rich.

    Contrary to the attacks, and Heresay, the facts tell a different story; that the SMBC board has performed their basic duties excellently.

    One thing has become very clear throughout this entire experience. IMBA's Southwestern Regional Director feels that he is right and any dissenting voice is wrong and a “conspiracy theorist”. I beg to differ. I thought I had seen it all but this is a first, I am witnessing someone intent on playing mountain bike advocacy GOD.

    What is certain is that IMBA's Southwestern Regional Director abused his influence and role by positioning himself as barrier between the SMBC and entities such as the USFS and holding back important information. This is why the SMBC board and our our “awesome” club members were excluded from participating in advocacy projects with the USFS and “ignored” and not “invited to the table”. By design.

    As far as I am concerned we DO deserve better. I hope IMBA is listening.

    CB

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by clockwork View Post
    I once slept at a holiday Inn but today I was deep in the forest smelling wet pines and enjoying hero dirt.
    Yeah! I say we Critical Mass this thread with stoke!
    Vassago Cycles, Shadetree Bikes, Flat Tire Bikes, Galfer Brakes USA

  43. #43
    dirt visionary
    Reputation: clockwork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,410
    Time for a ride !

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!-jess-pinal-3.jpg
    Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
    arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body.

  44. #44
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by IMBA south west View Post
    Dave, i'm not going to get into this any further with you on here, due to the mis-inperpretation of my words, for one reason or another. As I said, I plan to reserve a meeting room and all interested parties can come along and voice their opinions and ask questions. I'll let you know a date once I have one.

    Off to ride Flagstaff. Later.
    Interesting...

    As the story actually begins to come out, and everyone begins to see what our Chapter has been up against the Southwestern Regional Director of IMBA want's to take the discussion off-line.

    This tactic is not surprising given previous experience; our board was only met by the South Western Regional Director on two occasions despite many invitations. In stead each of us was always approached and contacted unilaterally.

    Our Chapter Charter termination is another example of this same behavior: In stead of calling a public meeting with the entire membership of the SMBC the Southwestern Regional Director sent out an email informing our members that our Chapter Charter had been terminated. No previous notices or warnings, written or otherwise.

    If the Southwestern Regional Director really wanted the best for our "awesome" members than he should have asked us to call a public meeting. He and our membership could have confronted their board, discussed any and all issues, and or sought change.

    How could this have possibly happened under a paid Professional Mountain Bike Advocate?

    The upcoming meetings are an attempt at damage control: to control, and spin the 'message' about what REALLY happened in Sedona, to discredit the Sedona Mountain Bike Club, and an attempt at installing/positioning another club as "the new" face and voice of mountain bike advocacy in Sedona.

    I am confident that the savvy among you are beginning to see the bigger picture here. It's a sorry state of affairs when we need to remain vigilant of our "champions".

    CB

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,906
    Quote Originally Posted by IMBA south west View Post
    Dave, i'm not going to get into this any further with you on here, due to the mis-inperpretation of my words, for one reason or another. As I said, I plan to reserve a meeting room and all interested parties can come along and voice their opinions and ask questions. I'll let you know a date once I have one.

    Off to ride Flagstaff. Later.
    Didn't the SMBC board already try and meet with you to clear up the air, initially in person and then changed to what was apparently a non-productive conference call? Apparently you mind was already made up at this point.

    Our board is excited to be meeting with Patrick Kell, South Western Regional Director of IMBA on Monday May 20th, 2013 to discuss the SMBC and IMBA’s partnership moving forward.
    It is our intention to present your comments and concerns to Patrick that you have voiced via the club website and those that were written at our first annual general membership meeting.
    We would also like to discuss with Patrick how the SMBC and IMBA can become a more effective team and more relevant in representing those interests.
    Ring a ding ding this Spring | SMBC

    For the record I'm a member of SMBC and IMBA but not sure what to make of all this. There isn't complete transparency wrt to the other club as well. There are no clear, well-articulated reports of the meetings VVVC has been having with the FS behind closed doors. But I am of the opinion that IMBA did not have SMBC's back when the FS decided to discriminate and close trails only to bikers. The relationship had soured long before then which is too bad as it was the members of SMBC that invited IMBA to the party.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: azjonboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,572
    Nice. Great ride partner!
    If you're lucky enough to be in the mountains,
    you're lucky enough.

  47. #47
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    So, Bike Doc = traildoc? If not, I don't think mental illness is solely an Irish thing. Clearly Sedona has that market cornered.

  48. #48
    Level 5 Rider!
    Reputation: Desidus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    210
    Hmmm for the most part it seems to be going in the right direction. I mean it's still up in the air but basically this is the same thing that is or has already happened in other areas. As more people get into it and as popularity grows it needs to become established and organized.

    As for singling out the MTB'rs I think that is a shame. I understand the reason though as there is probably much more possibility of environmental damage and excess from us than from trail riders. Still if it is illegal and more than one group is doing it then they ALL should be addressed.

    In general I see the Sedona groups point, but I think the other two groups are taking the road that most likely to end up in success. It would be nice if they both got results in some way or another. Hopefully you don't have too much butting heads between the two advocacy groups.
    You earn 1000 exp!
    You are now lvl 5! (5/100)
    Str +3, Sta +4, MTB Skills +1, Grip +1, Iron Butt +1
    New Item - Broken pedals

  49. #49
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Patrick:
    this whole thread does not pass the smell test. How are we misrepresenting when you say this: "None of these conversations were me conspiring, it's simply a matter that the SMBC board don't get asked to participate, it's not my fault". HOW THE F DO YOU WILLFULLY MARGINALIZE the local chapter, who built the trails you and your org are now sticking your d*** into? They didnt just 'not get invited', they were left out and you and you obviously did not feel they were important enough to merit inclusion. Don't spin this...you made agreements with the FS while willingly leaving out the locals. There is absolutely no other way that happened.

    Why am I getting involved? 2 reasons. You seem insincere to me after YOU reached out to ME, and you and IMBA are becoming involved with GROAZ.

    First: you contacted me, on Facebook, not even 30 min after I posted in this thread my disgust with IMBA. How did you even contact me on FB when you didnt know who I was? we'd never met or spoken. In your first note to me, you didn't introduce yourself. You started in by 1) implying how indebted I should be to IMBA because you are giving a grant to GROAZ of which I am a member. And 2) you said I like to hide. How do I have 5000 posts on here to your 50, and like to hide?

    Here below is the very first FB message i got from you friday 7-12. Heck of a way to introduce yourself, and fwiw, contacting MTBR members without invite outside of MTBR should get you timedout.

    Jason, it's interesting that you are a member/affiliated with GROAZ, who as an organization we are working with and have spend in excess of $6,000 (from the IMBA Trail Building Fund) in designing the bike park in Phoenix, yet you will go on MTBR and bash us. It would be great to chat in person. My number is 802-371-9033. Please feel free to give me a call, or send along your number and i'll call you. I'm not expecting to hear back from you, as you tend to hide, but I would genuinely like to talk in person.

    We exchanged 4 message, each one you invited me to talk. I wrote you a long, strong but polite email about why I didnt think IMBA belonged in Sedona or in GROAZ. My points were as have been stated over and over in this thread: you are not local, locals should not be excluded, IMBA should leave the FS to clean up its own mess and not try to take over advocacy. You have not even sent a brief reply saying 'thanks for your opinions, let's agree to disagree'. Seems to me that you are quite quick to get on the keyboard, but wont even bring polite closure to an exchange that you initiated cause I disagree with you.

    So why is IMBA involved with GROAZ? After reading all this, I will absolutely be asking these questions to our board. You and your org do not seem trustworthy. If your mission coincides with ours, that's great. thanks for the support. We welcome partners. But if you are trying to turn us into your puppet, or take over our locally-driven agenda...it will be made transparent.

  50. #50
    My other ride is your mom
    Reputation: Maadjurguer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,094
    Wow IMBA.........absent a mea culpa and an explanation, I say we're done here.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BCTJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,011
    Is Bike Doc the reincarnation of Trail Doc?

  52. #52
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,208
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    So, Bike Doc = traildoc? If not, I don't think mental illness is solely an Irish thing. Clearly Sedona has that market cornered.
    If you rode in Sedona, you would know the answer to this.

    The pedals give it away.
    "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.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    51
    Mabey IM wrong here but what im getting out of this is the IMBA saying: MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY. If your not with us we will run you off.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    Quote Originally Posted by BCTJ View Post
    Is Bike Doc the reincarnation of Trail Doc?
    No, but I got a shiny nickel that says they're good buddies.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    Fist off, this thread should be deleted. It doesn't do anything positive for the biking community. In fact, there's probably some equestrian trolling right now that will use it as ammo at a FS meeting.

    In the end, it all boils down to this...
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  56. #56
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,820
    Now that is funny shite

  57. #57
    Who took my gears?
    Reputation: dirtbyte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,544
    I am still laughing! My wife on the other hand was not so amused... Back to getting my gear ready for my next ride...

  58. #58
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,716

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!

    I had a great ride in Scottsdale today...no clashes nor arguments, just mountain biking.

    Regarding Sedona, I am f*ckrupt, without a single f*ck left to give...


    Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  59. #59
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Sounds like a good Western that needs the vermin (doc's) ran out of town. Time for Lucas McCain to come save the day.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GR1822's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,089
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    ... It would be great to chat in person. My number is 802-371-9033. Please feel free to give me a call, or send along your number and i'll call you. I'm not expecting to hear back from you, as you tend to hide, but I would genuinely like to talk in person.

    We exchanged 4 message, each one you invited me to talk. I wrote you a long, strong but polite email about why I didnt think IMBA belonged in Sedona or in GROAZ...
    So did you ever call him?
    Seems to me that conversations on the phone or in person are exponentially better than conversations via text/email/facebook/mtbr.

  61. #61
    PMP,TAN,LAUNDRY
    Reputation: azdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,250
    Just wanted to clarify a few points since GROAZ has been mentioned in this thread. GROAZ is an affiliate of IMBA which has helped with our future goal of bringing a mountain bike skills park to the valley metro area and working with the City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation. Although we support all mountain bike related advocacy groups in the state of Arizona we can't have first hand knowledge of all workings between them and IMBA. We will continue to push forward with our objective and working with IMBA to do so. We welcome feedback and if a member please attend our monthly meetings to see the inner workings.
    https://www.facebook.com/gravityride...ationofarizona
    Gravity Riders Organization Of Arizona
    Bender to AZDog: I'm not the best person to give advice on not riding!

  62. #62
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by GR1822 View Post
    So did you ever call him?
    Seems to me that conversations on the phone or in person are exponentially better than conversations via text/email/facebook/mtbr.
    Sometimes writing down your point and seeing if the person behind the keyboard will back up easy words with a real quotable response is more better.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,538
    Don't wait up for my call, honey.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  64. #64
    sonoranbiker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    466
    It's a bummer that things continue to be so dramatic in Sedona, as it's an amazing place that just about everyone loves to ride at... maybe it's the vortex's?

    I feel the need to chime in in Patrick's support. I am the Trails and Advocacy Director for Sonoran Desert Mountain Bicyclists (SDMB) in Tucson, and we are an IMBA Chapter that works with Patrick regularly on multiple projects. I can't speak for anyone else's experiences, but in his interactions with SDMB Patrick has been nothing but professional, supportive, and helpful. He has never pushed any sort of agenda, and has never gotten involved in anything without being asked first. His participation is proving to be tremendously helpful in our ongoing negotiations with the Pima County and USFS land managers, and our status as an IMBA Chapter appears to lend us greater legitimacy in the eyes of the land managers, in addition to a variety of other benefits.

    I also completely understand his desire to discuss things away from the forums, as in my experience discussions on forums such as this quickly degenerate into hyperbole, bombastic language, extreme/polarizing opinions, and a general lack of any sort of productive or adult conversations.

    In short, Patrick is a good guy who helps us out a lot, and we are in support of both him and IMBA. Please be careful not to judge without any direct information.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by Bike Doc View Post
    Patrick,
    I spoke with Dave Cichan yesterday after he read my original post here; and he informed me that he has a copy of a recording of a phone conversation between you and Rama,
    If it exists, post the audio file and bury the guy. If it doesn't, thanks for another trip down Sedrama Ln.

  66. #66
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by stevland View Post
    If it exists, post the audio file and bury the guy. If it doesn't, thanks for another trip down Sedrama Ln.
    I would hope someone mentioned the call was being recorded. If not I think a maybe a Federal and state law might have been broken.

    From a legal standpoint, the most important question in the recording context is whether you must get consent from one or all of the parties to a phone call or conversation before recording it. Federal law and many state wiretapping statutes permit recording if one party (including you) to the phone call or conversation consents. Other states require that all parties to the communication consent.

  67. #67
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,716
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    I would hope someone mentioned the call was being recorded. If not I think a maybe a Federal and state law might have been broken.

    From a legal standpoint, the most important question in the recording context is whether you must get consent from one or all of the parties to a phone call or conversation before recording it. Federal law and many state wiretapping statutes permit recording if one party (including you) to the phone call or conversation consents. Other states require that all parties to the communication consent.
    Arizona is one-party only, so no problem.
    Ride more; post less...

  68. #68
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by waltaz View Post
    Arizona is one-party only, so no problem.
    Good, I was worried.

  69. #69
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    Originally Posted by stevland
    If it exists, post the audio file and bury the guy. If it doesn't, thanks for another trip down Sedrama Ln


    And what's your motive?

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    618
    Evidence without the sh!t flinging. Otherwise, we're left with the same old Sedona nonsense cluttering the board.

  71. #71
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    Sometimes writing down your point and seeing if the person behind the keyboard will back up easy words with a real quotable response is more better.
    This is certainly none of my business, and I have no dog in this fight. I feel compelled to say, though, that this seems to me to be an incredibly backward way to conduct yourself as a grown man.

    Given the opportunity to have a possibly productive conversation, you choose to angle for a quotable response to use against this person?

    Does anyone wonder why it's so difficult to have a sane, rational discussion in today's environment? There's your answer.

    Cholla: I imagine you're going to take this as a personal attack. I can assure you I mean no disrespect. If your response is to tell me to pound sand, I'll gladly accept that and move on. I just felt compelled to call BS.

  72. #72
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    This is certainly none of my business, and I have no dog in this fight. I feel compelled to say, though, that this seems to me to be an incredibly backward way to conduct yourself as a grown man.

    Given the opportunity to have a possibly productive conversation, you choose to angle for a quotable response to use against this person?

    Does anyone wonder why it's so difficult to have a sane, rational discussion in today's environment? There's your answer.

    Cholla: I imagine you're going to take this as a personal attack. I can assure you I mean no disrespect. If your response is to tell me to pound sand, I'll gladly accept that and move on. I just felt compelled to call BS.
    Blatant:

    Since you set the bar so low, I just felt compelled to stick my nose where it doesnt belong too.

    If this is none of your busines...
    and you have no dog in the fight...
    and you mean no disrespect...

    Then why do you feel entitled to:

    - post about this?
    - criticize someone who was attacked and marginalized by for having an opinion?
    - comment on Cholla's preferred method of conversation given the "professionalism and respect" shown him in his first exchange?
    - call BS?

    You are either being unconsciously disingenuous or 'blatantly' condiscending as your post reads like a passive-agressive personal attack.

    "incredibly backward way to conduct yourself as a grown man" C'mon!

    "Possibly productive"!?... Where were you when the stock market was about to crash? You are obviously omnipotent.

    I can tell you with certainty that in the case of IMBA's current Southwestern Regional Director, I and others gave him the benefit of the doubt one too many times. ALL of my future correspondence will be recorded and posted in the public domain where they can be seen and read by all, and where sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

    CB

  73. #73
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    This is certainly none of my business, and I have no dog in this fight. I feel compelled to say, though, that this seems to me to be an incredibly backward way to conduct yourself as a grown man.

    Given the opportunity to have a possibly productive conversation, you choose to angle for a quotable response to use against this person?

    Does anyone wonder why it's so difficult to have a sane, rational discussion in today's environment? There's your answer.

    Cholla: I imagine you're going to take this as a personal attack. I can assure you I mean no disrespect. If your response is to tell me to pound sand, I'll gladly accept that and move on. I just felt compelled to call BS.
    no I dont take it personally. You're a straightup guy and not a dramaqueen, its certainly fair to grill me a bit. I was not trying to trap anyone, but I also don't want to be sold. Talk is easy, talkers like to talk and make friends and be charismatic. I'm an engineer-type, not a sales-type -- I dont want to be sold and made a buddy so I forgive. I've no doubt I'd agree with some of the selling: "the Sedona guys can be difficult, we need to think of the bigger picture, give some to get some etc etc". I'm sure Patrick is a nice guy, heart in the right place -- he would not be a Regional rep if he wasn't. But, I would much rather have a written account where the story stands on its own rather than a friendly one-on-one conversation where the personal element clouded my opinion of the actions. IMBA dropped SMBC because SMBC wanted to publicly, transparently call out FS decision makers for discrimination. What is wrong with a petition, fuggin democracy at work right there? This imo is tossing your constituents under the bus. At least get out of the way instead of turning your back on them in favor of regressive, possibly vengeful public officials. So no I dont want to support a way of doing things, via IMBA or the FS or anyone, that is premised on private discussions rather than openness.

  74. #74
    IPA tester
    Reputation: Dirtrider127's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    848
    Just wondering how many other chapters the IMBA has ever dropped from their membership?
    Seems like a local group like this would be best working with you than against.
    "We'll ride it until they pave it."

    -Urban Yeti
    Dirttreaders.com

  75. #75
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    Ah. Clearly you have much more info than I do. I was commenting on my perception of the quoted statement. I appreciate your willingness to discuss rather than throw firebombs. Knowing you, too, to be standup, it just struck me funny.

    I'll now see my way out ...

  76. #76
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Why is it this group and I am assuming they are the same can't get along with the FS and now can't get along with I.M.B.A.

    Their intentions might be good. But seems obvious to me the game plan is not working.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    359
    As someone who is very close to this, who has invested lots of volunteer time and effort, and who has seen this unfold real time, there is a lot of good and bad information on here. I am adding additional information, some of what is factual and other portions my opinion. I will attempt to delineate the two, and am sure someone will nit pick at each word in each line for an inconsistency. If you do not get the bigger picture of what I am saying, and need to do this, I really do not have a lot of time for those antics. This is an honest attempt here.

    Opinion: There are a lot of hurt feelings, and anger that is represented on this forum and in other venues with respect to this departure between IMBA and the SMBC. A lot of local mountain bikers view the SMBC as a local voice which has not been represented by the other local organization (VVCC), and IMBA. That is not to say that the VVCC nor IMBA do not represent mountain bikers. It is to say that while they represent the opinion of some local mountain bikers, they do not represent the opinion of all mountain bikers (local or otherwise). The SMBC has served to represent those who do not think/feel those other organizations adequately represent them. We, the SMBC and VVCC, have a few co-members. You can almost count the number on one hand.

    Fact: One of the reasons for the formation of the SMBC was to represent those who did not seek the representation of the VVCC on MTB matters here in Sedona. The thought was that there are people who are working outside the system. Some would say they were illegal trail builders, others would say they they were renegades, others would pin them with much worse labels. We call them local Sedona mountain bikers. By offering people an alternative voice, and by offering them control of that voice though a directly democratic process vs. the existing representative process, they were able to shape the SMBC and continue to do so to this day. They were able to enter the system of advocacy as a group to make their voice known. The VVCC is a cycling organization. Prior to the formation of the SMBC their membership was in the range of 120. Most would speculate the number of mountain bikers within their membership at the time was around 30. The last numbers I saw on their membership had them at around 100 as of May '13. The SMBC is sitting at roughly 70 members who are mountain bikers. With overlap of about 5-7 members, that adds another 63-65 cyclists to the advocacy equation, all of which are mountain bikers. I have nothing against non-MTB cyclists, even owning and occasionally riding a road bike. Since we are talking MTB advocacy here, it is relevant.

    Opinion: Anyone who is on the pro MTB side of things, including the VVCC and IMBA, bringing additional mountain bikers to the table should be viewed as a very positive thing. If those mountain bikers do not agree with the party line, are asking that their views not be suppressed for the "greater good", or fail to articulate ideas in a manner which one finds acceptable, it does not invalidate their fears/hopes/understanding with respect to the situation. I can understand someone or an entity who is counter to the MTB movement trying to suppress this type of activity, or attempting to exploit it. It is very difficult for me to understand, let alone justify those who is pro MTB doing so. It makes me question their motivation(s).

    Fact: The SMBC is not anti-IMBA, anti-VVCC, anti-USFS, etc. Rather, we are pro SMBC membership. Where and when it is in the interest of the SMBC members to align with the above and/or any other organization or individual, we will readily do so. Where and when it is in the interest of SMBC members to criticize, argue against, fight the above and/or any other organization or individual, we will do so as we see fit. This is no different than any of the above organizations, nor should it be. We represent our constituents, and lobby on their behalf, as it should be. We have been labelled as not working with the FS, obstructionists, etc.

    What is often ignored by those detractors are the various ways we have worked with agencies.

    -We have many members who have adopted trails here in the RRRD, and who volunteer time to maintain those trails all while complying with the RRRD adopt a trail rules.
    -We conceived, built, proposed, and were solicited by Jennifer Burns of the RRRD to execute a trial Q/R code project for this area which was an added value program with any proceeds directly benefiting the local trail system. This program was subsequently shut down by the same RRRD official shortly after the online petition, before it could get any real data or collect any trail funds.
    -One of our founders began the process of soliciting the city for a bike skills park nearly two years ago, well before the most recent efforts of by some local shops, the VVCC, and IMBA.
    -Several of our founders conceived, planned, and executed the first in a series of trail work day where they invited the USFS to meet members of the MTB community in an effort to build a bridge between both parties. This has subsequently been co-opted by other groups.
    -The SMBC submitted official support documents for the RTCA grant process in coordination with other groups such as IMBA and the VVCC, we actively participate in and have shown respect for the RTCA process. We have promoted ideas to help the process which were well received by Cate (facilitator), yet obstructed/ignored by the RRRD.
    -We have modified mapping links and software on our club site per any request made by the RRRD so as not to "promote" non-system trails, despite the fact that the information is already public and widely available online and often in hard copy maps sold by nearly every shop in the area.
    -There are other projects in the works which leverage technology and local/visiting mountain bikers to assist managing agencies in land management activities for the betterment of all trail users. I hesitate to provide more information as many ideas have been co-opted when possible, and suppressed as needed by various players in this arena.

    Opinion: And yet we remain in the eyes of may, and repeatedly reinforced by a few, to be Anti-USFS, anti-anything good, anti-American, and perhaps even anti-apple pie. This story is crap, and is a misnomer.

    As to IMBA and the SMBC I feel partially responsible for bringing IMBA into the mix (for good or bad). We, the co-founders, saw the chapter program as a possible way to bring a higher credibility to the club during its formation. In discussions with the current director (IMBA had not yet formed the SW region), there was great synergy with both IMBA and what the SMBC hoped to achieve. There was great synergy in how we hoped to achieve said goals. By the time we became a chapter the SW region position was formed, and the current director was assigned. We were initially happy that IMBA-SW lived within an hour of Sedona, and were excited to get things going. Over time, we became suspicious of IMBA-SW's actions. It was not that they were wrong, so much as they did not coincide with the plan and system we had signed up for with his predecessor at IMBA. In many ways they ran counter to what we had entered into. If felt so strongly about this that I wrote a letter to IMBA-SW and copied Mike Van Abel in an effort to identify problems and salvage this situation. To be very truthful, it was not the most pleasant letter. I was quite blunt, and very detailed. Mike's response revealed that IMBA-SW was acting within his directions, and that IMBA-SW's predecessor (who we had signed up for the chapter program with due to such great synergy) was ill-informed and wrong. In my mind, it took a lot of the angst I felt toward IMBA-SW away as he is simply doing his job. It made me question IMBA as a whole, and I began to see the beginning of the end of the relationship between myself and IMBA.

    Prior to all this IMBA as an organization was akin to being my hero. To this day I regret helping to bring IMBA to Sedona with the chapter program. Perhaps this would have happened anyway, as Sedona has been bubbling to the top of anyone's radar. Surely IMBA has had a plan for this area due to the MTB potential that is barely realized. I'll keep telling myself that in an effort to assuage some guilt at facilitating their arrival. Que: "There goes my hero" from the Foo Fighters here if you will.

    In the interim I would like to throw out some concepts. Take them for what you will:

    -Before their involvement we were able to ride all non-system trails. While they may have been illegally built, they were not illegal trails. The Casner area trails have been obliterated, and we recently have been restricted to system only trails in select areas in and around Sedona. Collectively we are at a loss of trail mileage. Would this have happened anyway? Would it have been worse? Did this hasten it the loss, slow it down, or did it make a difference at all? We don't know these answers, but the fact is that there is a collective loss in mileage and access.

    -They are not a democratic organization. You pay your money, you get what you get. Like it or lump it. Support it or admonish it. 70 people paid their money here, which many feel have been collectively ignored on some matters. I do not see a system within their organization for membership to frame the organization. Some might argue that it is the only option, and necessary. While that may be, you should be informed before you sign up for it.

    -What do you think is the right balance between maintaining relationships with the agencies you lobby, and those for whom you are lobbying? If IMBA has a legal arrangement in the form of a MOU between them and the USFS, and an implicit agreement between them and their membership how do they maintain this balance? Does it put them in a position of having to serve two masters?

    -Can an agency such as BLM, the USFS, and others adequately and effectively manage recreation when their traditional role has been that of resource management as related to extraction and harvesting? How does one convey the value in using the land for recreation beyond what it brings to the local tax base (something which is inadequately done I might add)? Simply kicking everyone and everything off the land as many environmental organizations seem to ply is not a long term solution. Where will the next generation of land stewards come from without exposure to the land? make no mistake, many mountain bikers are those stewards. With the loss of those stewards, and the loss of the value to those who would otherwise access the land for recreation, the only value left is resource extraction. Once it is gone, it is gone.

    -Why is it that everyone wants to admonish the illegal trail builders, yet seek to celebrate the fruits of their labor? I would say it is because there is great value in what has been created. Without them this place would not even be on the MTB map. This is not unique to Sedona either, as a vast amount of trails throughout the US have been built outside the prevue of land managers. Was every trail built perfectly without consequences, no way. Are there issues to be addressed, of course. Yet instead of recognizing that there is a better way to INCLUDE these craftsmen and craftswomen into solutions rather than ostracizing them thus loosing a great asset should be paramount to moving forward in a constructive way. Their voices went unanswered, and requests unmet for long enough that they took things into their own hands. So now that we are supposedly trying to bridge the gap between mountain bikers and the managing agencies, why do we (advocates) seek to close them (mountain bikers) out again? Talk about not learning from past mistakes. Talk about setting people up for failure. You don't need to be Nostradomas to see what will happen if this continues.

    I am still looking at such questions, as well as what are the best paths forward for mountain bikers here in Sedona. I know that we are not the only place where these types of issues exist, albeit with different details. What I do know is that the SMBC exists for a reason, and satisfies a group of people (not all illegal trail builders I might add) who would not otherwise be served. There is value in that which does not dissipate with IMBA's de-sanctioning.
    Grammar and spelling errors are complementary.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by schwing_ding View Post

    -Why is it that everyone wants to admonish the illegal trail builders, yet seek to celebrate the fruits of their labor?
    I applaud illegal trail builders, while IMBA sycophants whine about sustainability. I do wish some were smarter about discussing their efforts.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  79. #79
    My other ride is your mom
    Reputation: Maadjurguer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,094
    Excellent comments Schwing_ding

  80. #80
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,614
    Thank you for the comments.

    In the course of writing the Sedrama Pinkbike article it was difficult to escape the conclusion that IMBA is inherently conflicted. IMBA as a national advocacy organization feels it has to work with the USFS on a national basis by adopting a policy of no confrontation. It appears that may mean that at least some local Sedona mountainbike advocates (the SMBC) are thrown away from the IMBA fold.

    What is supremely confusing about this is, that in the past, IMBA has been vociferous in their support for local advocates who have been vocally against USFS trail closures. This is not so in Sedona. Why?

    It will make for an interesting article update.
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  81. #81
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,733
    Very interesting thread.
    I don't rattle.

  82. #82
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeL View Post
    Thank you for the comments.

    In the course of writing the Sedrama Pinkbike article it was difficult to escape the conclusion that IMBA is inherently conflicted. IMBA as a national advocacy organization feels it has to work with the USFS on a national basis by adopting a policy of no confrontation. It appears that may mean that at least some local Sedona mountainbike advocates (the SMBC) are thrown away from the IMBA fold.

    What is supremely confusing about this is, that in the past, IMBA has been vociferous in their support for local advocates who have been vocally against USFS trail closures. This is not so in Sedona. Why?

    It will make for an interesting article update.
    re-reading your article and the older MTBR thread were very informative, lots more info and statements from the stakeholders.

    IMPORTANT- Petition seeking equal trail access for Mountain Bikes

    Sedrama - Growing Pains in Sedona - Pinkbike

    IMBA sounds in the old MTBR thread like they are offended SMBC is even in the same sport. based on the silence it seems that IMBA has nothing new to say and the truth is all on the table already. Does IMBA have any counterpoints we have missed? But, as has been stated before by IMBA's SW Rep, he doesnt find much use in MTBR. And, we also have clearly seen that IMBA prefers to ignore those who don't agree. So I guess most of us on this board are getting IMBAiled by the IMBAciles too. YMMV. What working rapport does IMBA expect moving forward? Ignoring a major stakeholder is about as bush-league as you can get for people ostensibly about consensus-building. Should be interesting when they hold their leadership summit in Sedona next year. "How come we're not stopping for coffee at Bike and Bean?"

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    489
    CB; you have given a well researched, accurate, opinion of the morass that has become Sedona biking politics.(Here in BC I'call it a pissin match; but then we are pretty ruff.) That, instead of all the guys and gals that are passionate about mountain biking, as you are, getting together to discuss issues; to agree and to disagree; and to respect each other. ie to do the things that Americans do to build a better situation.

    I can only hope that IMBA, which I am a member of through my local Club here in BC, will see the destruction they have done, and offer the hand of respect to SMBC and it's members; and that, in turn, SMBC members will accept and forgive; and get their great minds and enthusiastic bodies back working positively for the betterment of biking.
    But, in the interim, would you let me know if/how I can join SMBC, to positively contribute to its' goals.
    thanks. TS

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,906
    SMBC is also being marginalized by the FS. All the more reason that IMBA should have had their back. They should have a seat at the table.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418

    Is BCTJ the reincarnation of a moron?

    Quote Originally Posted by BCTJ View Post
    Is Bike Doc the reincarnation of Trail Doc?
    Maybe everyone on this forum who uses the word "biker" as part of their name is really the same person, just using a different name to talk to themself.
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!

    Lol regarding #6. Regarding #1-5, it's no wonder IMBA kicked you out. Based on these comments, it sounds like they were holding you back anyway. So, what's the problem?

    (P.S. do you seriously want to come on a public forum and say building illegal mountain bike trails is a good thing?)
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  87. #87
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,820
    Ahh, childish name calling.... That will get people to give a chit about your opinion.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418

    When the Government Lies and Cheats...

    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Observer View Post
    (P.S. do you seriously want to come on a public forum and say building illegal mountain bike trails is a good thing?)
    When the Government lies and cheats, I believe that they are leading by example, and therefore nobody is bound by "the rules" any longer.

    Title 36 of the code of Federal regulations states that the Forest Service must give 60 days advance notice before closing trails to public uses, unless there is an "emergency". In an "emergency", they may close an area without prior notice.

    HOWEVER, an "emergency" closure may only be instituted for one year, and can be extended for a second year, sometime during the first year, if the "emergency" situation persists.

    Under no condition, may an "emergency" closure extend beyond two years. This regulation is designed to keep crooked land managers from crying, "Emergency!" "Emergency!" "Emergency!" "Emergency!" "Emergency!", year after year, without some level of accountability to the public.

    When the Red Rock ranger District of the Forest Service instituted the mountain biking trail closures in Sedona, it was done just 30 days after first announcing that they were "thinking about" a closure, and the closure extends for OVER two and a quarter years.

    This is illegal.

    Let's look at a hypothetical situation:

    Imagine that a person is working as a fee collector at the main entrance station in Zion National Park. They live in the employee housing within the park. They may become annoyed after a while at all of the four million visitors that come into the park, especially the ones that leave dirty diapers and other trash sitting on the bank of the river, or deface petroglyph panels.

    Maybe one eveving, as they are closing up the fee station for the night, they take notice of the emergency barricades behind the fee station, and think to themselves, "This is my park. I live here. These people don't respect this place. They don't belong here." And so they drag the barricade with a "Emergency - Road Closed" sign out from behind the fee station and block the road entering the park.

    Now, to a person driving up to the entrance station, this appears to be an official Park Service person in Park Service uniform, erecting an official emergency closure sign.

    HOWEVER, if there is no real emergency, this is actually an illegal closure.

    Over the next few hours, dozens of cars arrive at the entrance station, see the sign, and turn around, disappointed that the park is closed.

    Then YOU drive up to the entrance station, hoping to do a moonlight hike on that beautiful full moon night. And YOU are smarter than the average bear. AND as you have been driving along Highway 9, you have been listening to the park's informational radio station. AND you have not heard them say anything about any closure.

    So, instead of turning around like all the other visitors have done, you call information, and get a phone number for the Park Ranger's Dispatch Office, and call the dispatcher.

    You ask them what the emergency is, and when they expect to have the road opened again. They tell you that there is no emergency and that the road is not closed. You inform them of the sign on the barricade, and they tell you that someone must have played a prank, and ask you to move the barricade back behind the fee collection station, where they store it.

    Let's examine what happened here from a legal standpoint:

    1. A closure sign was erected illegally.

    2. An illegally placed closure sign denies the public's right to access public land.

    3. Legally, this qualifies as a "public nuisance".

    4. Any citizen, upon becoming aware of a public nuisance has the right to abate said nuisance. It may even be argued in some cases, that they have a RESPONSIBILITY to abate said nuisance, especially if it creates a public safety concern.

    Since certain individuals within the Red Rock Ranger District of the Forest Service conspired to institute an illegal "emergency" closure, the closure is NOT enforceable, and therefore, any and all signs stating that there is such an "emergency" closure in effect, legally qualify as "public nuisances" and therefore should be abated by law abiding citizens.

    So, hopefully all of you law abiding mountain bikers will do the responsible thing if any of these illegally placed signs still exist, and ABATE THIS PUBLIC NUISANCE IMMEDIATELY!!!

    These criminals, masquerading as public servants need to be held accountable for their illegal actions, and forced to follow the rules that exist to protect the public from over-reaching bureaucrats!!!

    VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!!!

    Public participation.

    [Title 36 CFR 295.3]
    [Code of Federal Regulations (annual edition) - July 1, 2002 Edition]
    [Title 36 - PARKS, FORESTS, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY]
    [Chapter II - FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE]
    [Part 295 - USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES OFF FOREST SERVICE ROADS]
    [Sec. 295.3 - Public participation.]
    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


    36PARKS, FORESTS, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY22002-07-012002-07-01false295.3Sec. 295.3PARKS, FORESTS, AND PUBLIC PROPERTYFOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREUSE OF MOTOR VEHICLES OFF FOREST SERVICE ROADS
    Sec. 295.3 Public participation.

    The public shall be provided an opportunity to participate in the
    process of allowing, restricting, or prohibiting use of areas and trails
    to one or more specific vehicle types off forest development roads.
    Sixty days advance notice will be given to allow for public review of
    proposed or revised designations. In emergency situations, temporary
    designations up to one year in length may be made or revised without
    public participation if needed to protect the resources and/or to
    provide for public safety.

    [[Page 389]]
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    Quote Originally Posted by Bike Doc View Post
    Title 36 of the code of Federal regulations states that the Forest Service must give 60 days advance notice before closing trails to public uses, unless there is an "emergency". In an "emergency", they may close an area without prior notice.
    The USFS didn't close down an area. They closed illegally built trails in an area. All of the system trails in the "closure" areas are still legal to ride.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,170
    This thread is so delicious. I am fully entertained, keep it coming!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by raisingarizona View Post
    This thread is so delicious. I am fully entertained, keep it coming!
    Just posting here to c@ckblock m77's inevitable piggy-back post!
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  92. #92
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,208
    I'm downilling right now, but I'm reading the thread on the chairlift.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!-image.jpg  

    "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.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    120
    As a former employee of the RRRD and current gummint employee(upgraded to NPS - no mountain bikers on the Island Loop Trail) I should take offense but its par for the job it seems... But it is really difficult not to add rational discussion to counter the troll(?)'s rant... Must resist... On a brighter note, anyone see this:

    http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_...rdb5427330.pdf

    Lots of good stuff! I would love to see the connector between Flagstaff and Sedona via Kachina Trail. Might have to skip softball to come to the next meeting!

  94. #94
    1 bike to ride them all
    Reputation: CANADIANBACON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    211
    TS,

    Thank you for your supportive post. Yes, the SMBC would be honored to have you as a member.

    We hope to be able to accept new memberships via our website soon. If anyone is interested in joining please PM me and I will make sure you receive an email when we are live.

    Although it has only been a short while since the SMBC received our Chapter Charter termination notice, the outpouring of support from around Arizona and the larger mountain bike community has been humbling.

    Thank you everyone for the inspiration and support!

    CB

  95. #95
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Anyone get any rain in the valley tonight?

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    Anyone get any rain in the valley tonight?
    No but I got hammered on Friday. Oh and I got some rain too. Rode today on Deems and the grip was unreal! How about you?
    Vassago Cycles, Shadetree Bikes, Flat Tire Bikes, Galfer Brakes USA

  97. #97
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,201
    Raining in the far west valley.

  98. #98
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by cstem View Post
    No but I got hammered on Friday. Oh and I got some rain too. Rode today on Deems and the grip was unreal! How about you?
    Getting hammered right now. Bet PMP will have some nice changes for us!

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    Getting hammered right now. Bet PMP will have some nice changes for us!
    Silly rock fairies.....I wonder if they'll try to fill in the new craters w/ the original rocks they dug out?
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,851

    Sedona Kicked Out of I.M.B.A!!!

    Deems was great! Washed away all the slush and exposed all the glad buried baby heads. Made climbing tougher and descending trickier!


    Sent from your Moms phone using Tapinthat.
    Vassago Cycles, Shadetree Bikes, Flat Tire Bikes, Galfer Brakes USA

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tahoe kicked my butt
    By Wherewolf in forum Passion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-12-2013, 04:44 PM
  2. Tahoe kicked my butt
    By Wherewolf in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-11-2013, 09:31 PM
  3. Got kicked out of trail review 2X
    By Fleas in forum Site Feedback/Issues
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-14-2013, 09:31 AM
  4. Kicked out of the peninsula thanks to dot com II, San Jose?
    By acctnut in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-03-2013, 07:19 PM
  5. Get your Pass kicked
    By Douger-1 in forum Arizona
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-30-2012, 04:18 PM

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

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