Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 176
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timetraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    303

    China Camp Trail Sanitation

    Rode China Camp today. I guess I know where the money is going to go. It was already a beginner trail with a few semi-challenging spots. Apparently the goal is to have a smooth wide trail that won't twist an ankle or require a first timer to get off their bike. This spot was one of the fun ones, requiring the rider to pick a line and maneuver through tree roots. It had been like that for years and was not in need of repair. No, the new management brought in a Bobcat and tore out tree roots and rocks and left this freeway. This is the Bay View Trail right before the fire road comes in on the right (Going Downhill).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails China Camp Trail Sanitation-china-camp11.jpg  

    China Camp Trail Sanitation-china-camp12.jpg  


  2. #2
    Wēk Ss
    Reputation: IAmHolland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,635
    weak! my 8yo son loved the China Camp loop! This sucks. Is the small rocky-ish bit at the top part of Bay View still there?

  3. #3
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,484
    Is this Bayview? If it is, nothing new there. Been dozing that place for far to long. if you want kicks hit up the dark side of the moon!

  4. #4
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,290
    ...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    473
    is that the one section right after the bridge at Echo?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cannondalegirl120's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    23
    If you're talking about right before the fire road, this is what it looked like before.....
    ( i uploaded the pic from my iphone. the pic looked straight on my iphone but the computer had it turned to the side anyway re-uploaded it from my computer tonight sorry about that)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails China Camp Trail Sanitation-china-camp.jpg  

    Last edited by cannondalegirl120; 01-18-2013 at 09:47 PM.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timetraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by cannondalegirl120 View Post
    If you're talking about right before the fire road, this is what it looked like before.....
    That's the section. I came in from Dominican side and didn't ride the whole trail today. That's the only part worked so far. The bobcat was still there. I was there last week and this is new.

  8. #8
    pro leisure tour
    Reputation: sparkyJay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    773
    Definitely WEAK!!
    If you see someone without a smile, give them yours

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    945
    aw man, i liked that section! i used to clean it just fine dozens of time, then did an endo to faceplant while daydreaming about krispy kreme (got spooked for a few years) and returned last month after a long time to reclean it!
    94 Specialized Rockhopper

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: splatworldwide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    221
    Ugh. Super lame.
    Loud hubs save lives. http://about.me/splat/

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    24
    thats bullsh*t....


    there's no way I'm going to pay to ride bull-dozed double track

  12. #12
    (slight return)
    Reputation: slide mon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,088
    Ridiculous, that really sucks, I ride up that section about once a week and it was the only thing on the official trail system that could remotely be considered a challenge. FOCC is proving to be very bad for bikers, major bummer.

    -slide

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,395
    That totally sucks. Here is a better pic of where I think the OP is talking about...



  14. #14
    (slight return)
    Reputation: slide mon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,088
    Anyone know if MCBC was involved here?

    -slide

  15. #15
    Rider of Berms
    Reputation: jaisun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    23
    That is extremely disappointing.

    I have to admit, I was actually really upset for a few minutes after I saw that. Now I've gone through shock and denial and have moved on to a different stage of grieving.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    460
    This is infuriating!!!!

    That was the only remotely technical spot on the front main loop, fair challenge for intermediate riders and no problems for a beginner to walk that short section if they were not comfortable riding. That section is a fun link between other awesome trails there, now its no longer.....

    I don't understand why FOCC would expect mtbers to pay to ride sanitized double wide fire roads in disguise, let alone pay more than hikers/runners!!

    I am giving MCBC a call first thing in the morning tomorrow to see where they stand, I hope they were not supporting this action of destroying fun and perfectly good trails.

    CC is a gem to bay area riders and we are the major use group of the park, our input on the trail management needs to be taken into consideration, not bulldozed over so granny bird watcher has an easier stroll through the woods...

    Anyone who supports the trail use fees needs to think long and hard about where they are sending their money and what it is being used for, so far this is not looking like a winning proposition for mtbers.....

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by IrieRider View Post

    so far this is not looking like a winning proposition for mtbers.....
    this also doesn't look like a winning proposition for the park, it's obvious they are not taking into consideration the damage they are causing the park by making these trails even less natural and even wider. In that very location on several instances I have seen young owls roosting in the trees they decided to cut down to make way for this freeway. Also, it doesn't appear as if they thought out drainage by removing all of the roots and rocks I dare say they will have increased erosion of this area several fold. What is means to me : ****tier - less fun ride, that is not sustainable for the park and having to pay for the displeasure and destruction. What the hell, "F"oCC... what the hell.

    edit : Will someone PLEASE think of the children (taken at the exact same sanitized spot now missing most of the trees circa 2010)

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timetraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by ghettocop View Post
    That totally sucks. Here is a better pic of where I think the OP is talking about...


    That is a great picture of what used to be a fun section. After riding through it and realizing what was done I fell to the ground and started crying like a little girl....well...ok..actually I was pissed off and snapped a few pics to document the damage. I'm sending an email to FOCC with before and after pics and politely explain that this was improper and a tragedy on a par with the Exxon Valdez. I fear for what other spots they think "need improvement".

  19. #19
    Rider of Berms
    Reputation: jaisun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by IrieRider View Post
    This is infuriating!!!!


    I am giving MCBC a call first thing in the morning tomorrow to see where they stand, I hope they were not supporting this action of destroying fun and perfectly good trails.

    CC is a gem to bay area riders and we are the major use group of the park, our input on the trail management needs to be taken into consideration, not bulldozed over so granny bird watcher has an easier stroll through the woods...

    Anyone who supports the trail use fees needs to think long and hard about where they are sending their money and what it is being used for, so far this is not looking like a winning proposition for mtbers.....

    I would be very interested in hearing the result of that call. Hope you post back with an update. I've emailed Friends of China Camp with a number of questions with no reply.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,092
    This is really disappointing. This is simply an example of CSP trails policy and standard in action.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,590
    this is horrible! that spot is the only one on the entire front side where i have trouble on the ascent...in recent years as the roots have gotten more pronounced my clearance ratio has declined, but it is always a fun challenge. this sux big time. it can't be good for the trees either...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Why the heck do they do this stuff? Doesn't it cause erosion? Even when I hike with my wife and kids I'd much rather hike natural foot paths as opposed to narrow fireroads.

    Bring on the heavy rains, they'll fix it sooner or later.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hikers Only's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    489
    [/QUOTE]

    R.I.P.

  24. #24
    I'm really diggin it!
    Reputation: Davey Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,119
    Hey guys. I believe the primary reason for this trail realignment happening is that the land managers and even bike advocates don't understand what mountain bikers want. The realignment may seem like an evil conspiracy but it isn't. The land managers, trail workers and bike advocates are the ones that through a system of volunteering and memorizing acronyms like EIR and CEQA create a power structure where they find themselves in charge. Now condescending advocates can tell the locals what is good for them. They create a process where the locals are not even made aware of changes that will occur and when the changes begin we are told sorry you should have been to the meeting we held months ago while you were out of town. They truly believe they know what is best for us.

    Since I started working the Tamarancho flow trail build I've heard the following: "this kind of trail building makes my job as a bike advocate more difficult" and "you are stealing all of our volunteers". The first comment showed that advocates have no idea what most mountain bikers want and the second shows a hostile power hungry environment. Volunteers for what I ask: for trail eradication or unpopular realignment? No wonder no one will help you I say. To be fair I have also been thanked for doing good work as well. Mostly, I have been made aware of a tremendous gulf that lies between "bike advocates" and intermediate ability and above skill level mountain bikers. The problem is that neither group understand the other very well. The conspiracy may be that creating a vanilla experience will drive mountain bikers elsewhere but I have no proof of that. For now I will just chalk it up to a big misunderstanding. The best solution that I see for all of us is to join the FOCC and be sure to give them an earful of feedback. MTBR chatter unfortunately will have zero impact on the course of action that takes place at China Camp. We need to be PRESENT at the FOCC meetings.

    I have seen that some of you have requested feedback from the FOCC and have not gotten any. This indicates a hostility toward mountain bikers. We need to document this. Please keep sending your feedback to FOCC and and post the response here. Also send feedback to MCBC and post the response here as well.

    I was called out for claiming that this would happen and made to feel a fool. Now it seems that I may have been right. I was going to lie low and finish the Tamo flow trail build. Now I will get involved. I need everyone's help. We need to form our own group that will truly represent mountain bikers in Marin. Not form a political compromise that will result in an experience that none of us want. What do you guys say?

    Davey Simon cejocky@gmail.com 916 337 9939 time to get started.

  25. #25
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,205
    I am bummed, as a single speed rider these little obstacles become a bit challenging (FUN). They got rid of the FUN! I won't complain too much, as that work looks like it will look like the rest of that trail in a few years (good). My complaint is that there are many areas that need maintenance, and that spot could be left alone while repairs/drainage could be used in other areas.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    924

    Maybe post these pics and questions to FOCC Facebook page?

    Let people see how the money is being spent.
    Live to Ride, Ride to Live

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: splatworldwide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by Brah View Post
    Let people see how the money is being spent.
    I just posted a comment on their FB page.

    I was hoping to get out for a quick lunch ride at China Camp today, but just thinking about running into this bulldozed section totally discouraged me.

    This is just lighting a fire under my ass to get over to Tamarancho for some real singletrack and trail digging this weekend.
    Loud hubs save lives. http://about.me/splat/

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    313
    letter sent. unreal whats going on around here. Glad there are great things happening up at Tamarancho however.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,590
    i sent a note to focc, gave them a failing grade in stewardship so far.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by Davey Simon View Post
    Hey guys. I believe the primary reason for this trail realignment happening is that the land managers and even bike advocates don't understand what mountain bikers want.
    Hi there Davey,

    I think while this statements has merits what I am trying to understand is how is bulldozing through habitat is beneficial for the park, for it's users and for the creatures that call CC home. My feelings aside as a cyclist, I don't see how this practice of turning single track into wide double track + is helpful for the overall health of the park. If anything, they should be trying to restore features to their [more] natural state pushing back run outs so that the trails remain within their boundaries and stop creeping wider and wider (as they have over the years of overuse and under-maintenance). I see that the FOCC has tried to eliminate some of the cut corners and unsanctioned trails, that I understand but cutting out roots, moving rocks and making trails artificially wider than they already are seems counter productive. This section currently in question is now virgin soil without the roots and rocks that have been there for some time, in the middle of winter. I only can predict that this section will be a giant washed out rut by the time winter comes to an end.

    Mean while I am impressed with the work that you and your volunteers have been putting in at T-ranch, if CC subscribed to similar sentiments in terms of their trail maintenance I feel CC would be better off in the long run. Better for sustainability, preservation and for the enjoyment of all parties who use CC for leisure and recreation.

  31. #31
    screamer
    Reputation: budgie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,241
    Such a bummer. This section always made for a nice little (climbing) challenge, and I think actually made the descent safer: there are some blind corners in this area, and having to scrub some speed for the rooty section lessened the likelihood of collisions. Let's evaluate: 1) exacerbated erosion, 2) increased speed & chance of collisions, 3) damaged plants & risk to the tree, 4) greatly diminished fun-factor.

    Nice work, people. No way will I be paying a trail fee to these jackholes.
    On heavy rotation: White Lung: Deep Fantasy

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    I guess I'll just stick to the unmarked trails near my house for roots. As a rigid single speeder these root areas are a challenge (for me) and I like trying to clear them on climbs.

    For what it's worth, they do the same thing at Skegg's and it normalizes fairly fast in winter.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Davey Simon View Post

    I have seen that some of you have requested feedback from the FOCC and have not gotten any. This indicates a hostility toward mountain bikers. We need to document this. Please keep sending your feedback to FOCC and and post the response here. Also send feedback to MCBC and post the response here as well.
    Keep in mind any lack of response may be a result of ones approach and tone as well. You know the saying about honey and vinegar. To be physically present at meetings would be key, as electronic communications largely go unnoticed or unheeded and don't accomplish much. Everything has a process and to be hostile, demanding and rowdy (which is common for forums) won't do much. There may not necessarily be hostility toward the mtb crowd...

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    Keep in mind any lack of response may be a result of ones approach and tone as well. You know the saying about honey and vinegar. To be physically present at meetings would be key, as electronic communications largely go unnoticed or unheeded and don't accomplish much. Everything has a process and to be hostile, demanding and rowdy (which is common for forums) won't do much. There may not necessarily be hostility toward the mtb crowd...
    Not a good excuse. I did PR for a semi government agency for years and we answered all emails within a couple business days no matter what the tone. The place I worked had a lot of haters too. It's just part of your job.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,092
    I am bummed too.

    CSP trails would be monotonous if mother nature wasn't such a brute.

    Let me show you my experience about the hypothesis that it seems as though State Parks has a bias against mountain biking.

    Jim Donnelly Enters Rehab

    We are in some strange new times.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    460
    Spoke with someone from MCBC today, doesn't sound like they knew of this bulldozing plan, but I was not able to reach their "Dirt Director". I made it very clear that as a MCBC member I am disappointed something like this would happen at a trail system they are now encouraging us to pay to access and that it does not fit within the goals of environmental stewardship, they have a trail work day scheduled for the 27th, why did they have to do this ahead of time?

    On a positive note, I was pretty impressed with the MCBC rep, I spoke with him this morning and he was not aware of any work that had been done at the trails, he then followed up with me in the afternoon after he had a chance to ride the front loop out there.
    He assured me MCBC had no involvement and was not aware of the work being done. He also said he spoke with some of the FOCC and State Park folks that did this foolish work and their claim was that trail sanitization had been planned for some time because there had been several injuries in that section not just limited to bikers , very lame excuse and pretty frustrating they decided not to share their plans with anyone and that they would excute it in such a crude and damaging manor. He also said they had no other work of that nature planned and that he tried to confer to them that MCBC and the mtb community is noticing all the trail work they do and that they should take input from mtbers since they are a major user group at the park. While I still disagree with MCBC position on the trail use fees, I really respect and appreciate someone form the organization taking the time to check out the trails first hand and make an effort to convey to the park operators the perspective of mountain bikers.

    I'm with you Davey, we need to be PRESENT at FOCC meetings to make sure our voice is heard and that we are taken seriously as a user group.
    Last edited by IrieRider; 01-18-2013 at 06:03 PM.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mt. Tam Haze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    187
    Davey- I'm with you on this, we need to make a stand.

    I have tried to join FOCC to voice the opinion of mtbr's but the "join" link on the website merely takes you to a donations page, WTF. I refuse to donate to this organization and will not join if donating is mandatory.

    FUCC FOCC!
    Last edited by Mt. Tam Haze; 01-18-2013 at 07:47 PM.

  38. #38
    sure...follow me
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    102
    The sanitizing of bike trails using this method has happened elsewhere. One of my frequent rides is at Red Tail trail in Chabot. The trail was plowed, widened to about 6-8 feet wide and the tracked, skid-steer machine they used stirred up the dirt so bad that it was not virtually unrideable, but REALLY unrideable. The dust and dirt was about 6 inches thick, so it was just like riding on the beach. When I walked through Red Tail to finish my loop I noticed there were no tire tracks or foot prints. Nobody used the trail. I did not go back for about 8-9 months. However, in all fairness, the trail did come back and it now almost the way it used to be, so there is hope for that section at China Camp.

  39. #39
    I'm really diggin it!
    Reputation: Davey Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,119

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,092
    Quote Originally Posted by omanwurmi View Post
    Nobody used the trail. I did not go back for about 8-9 months. However, in all fairness, the trail did come back and it now almost the way it used to be, so there is hope for that section at China Camp.
    Okay everyone, how many times have we seen this sort of "trail-work" happen in our various neighborhoods? Even with noble ideals, the machine work is more often borne by trail users like us as some sort of meteorological cataclysm; the opposite of the functional intent.

    Furthermore, in many cases the released sediment takes flight in dust during dry times and coats indigenous flora and fauna with grit, and gets washed wholesale down gulches and into riparian habitats. Not always, but too often, this kind of trail maintenance also damages the surrounding canopy. Not only that, proper finish work, including deberming, blending the upslope, measuring and finishing the bench to proper outslope (taking into account actual measurements, side-slope and not just some guys rule of thumb), creating drainage features, ensuring drainages are countersunk, etc, are often not done.

    Worst case scenarios include: Cutting tree roots will stress trees. They will fall. Animals who live in these trees fall. The trees hold up a good part of the hillside. More damage. Domino effect. Sweco or trail machine undercuts unstable back slope and a year later a land-slide takes out the trail. Sweco or trail machine cuts into surfacing water over shallow bedrock, a spring, and the trail becomes a perpetual mud bog in situ.

    State parks strive to make their trails safe to "insure public safety"(sic). CSP's goal of safe smooth and wide trail means no fun and a deep scar upon the landscape and a take on wildlife for the rest of us.

    Any trail which might cause a problem are the kinds of trails we like here. CSP would spend our money to either sanitize them or close them, unless we pushback very very hard as a group.

    The CSP "one-size-fits-all" trail standards are wrong. The CSP strategy is analagous to the "shot-gun approach". We should not let them manage State Park trail systems this way.

    Last edited by Jack Burns; 01-18-2013 at 10:46 PM.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: etuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    919
    Man. Right when I started mountain biking I remember sitting at this section and trying to climb it over and over again. I also remember the first time I cleaned it and how stoked I was on mountain biking, progression, etc.
    Previously known as mttamrnr.

  42. #42
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    To be physically present at meetings would be key, as electronic communications largely go unnoticed or unheeded and don't accomplish much.
    Guys, this has all been done before, all been heard before, in the 26 years of advocacy.

    Actual presence at "meetings" is where the least amount of participation occurs. There are isolated occasions when the mob shows up enraged but that settles down sooner or later. The ones who sit at the front table are always there. How do you think that makes us look?

    MTB advocacy started, in the East Bay anyhow, in 1987 when we were totally shut out of parks. THEN everyone showed up and the BTCEB was formed. MBTC was formed about the same time. Once the urgency subsided, with renewed but limited access, the fall-off of participants was precipitous. An invested few remained to do all the work, trying hard to get people involved. Presence at "meetings", face-to-face, discussions, panels....many, many hours.

    Actual gains, specifically the sort expressed here as desired, were not possible, though it took years to admit this. Extant rules and guidelines did not include us and the antis used that as leverage. People, those who seemed to have the time and inclination, walked away from advocacy as pointless and further energy expended as futile. You can hear this in the voices of many.

    Many good advocates just quit. Many refuse to step back on board as they have learned their lessons. A few meetings won't do, especially if there are regulations and Master Plans in place that prescribe use and development. Numbers, political influence, money and time is what it seems to take. Once folks realize this, they go ride their bikes.

    We have to do something different and adjust our expectations. Repeating the same things over and over again........
    I don't rattle.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Guys, this has all been done before, all been heard before, in the 26 years of advocacy.

    We have to do something different and adjust our expectations. Repeating the same things over and over again........
    I'm sure most everyone here is open to what those with many years of experience with these issues think is best and most effective.

  44. #44
    I'm really diggin it!
    Reputation: Davey Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,119
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Guys, this has all been done before, all been heard before, in the 26 years of advocacy.

    Actual presence at "meetings" is where the least amount of participation occurs. There are isolated occasions when the mob shows up enraged but that settles down sooner or later. The ones who sit at the front table are always there. How do you think that makes us look?

    MTB advocacy started, in the East Bay anyhow, in 1987 when we were totally shut out of parks. THEN everyone showed up and the BTCEB was formed. MBTC was formed about the same time. Once the urgency subsided, with renewed but limited access, the fall-off of participants was precipitous. An invested few remained to do all the work, trying hard to get people involved. Presence at "meetings", face-to-face, discussions, panels....many, many hours.

    Actual gains, specifically the sort expressed here as desired, were not possible, though it took years to admit this. Extant rules and guidelines did not include us and the antis used that as leverage. People, those who seemed to have the time and inclination, walked away from advocacy as pointless and further energy expended as futile. You can hear this in the voices of many.

    Many good advocates just quit. Many refuse to step back on board as they have learned their lessons. A few meetings won't do, especially if there are regulations and Master Plans in place that prescribe use and development. Numbers, political influence, money and time is what it seems to take. Once folks realize this, they go ride their bikes.

    We have to do something different and adjust our expectations. Repeating the same things over and over again........
    So what should we do Berkeley Mike? I don't want to repeat past mistakes.

  45. #45
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,732
    1. Start by defining what it is that people want. Mtbr is great for that, it's all here: create a list.

    2. Next talk personally with someone close to the situation about what is wanted and what might be possible: who might that be?

    I'm guessing you guys might not be too happy with what you hear but you need to take those steps.

    Then pick your battle, make a plan of attack, gather your resources, sally forth.

    1 and 2 are easy......
    I don't rattle.

  46. #46
    Like a boss.
    Reputation: Piranha426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by slide mon View Post
    Anyone know if MCBC was involved here?

    -slide
    Slide - no. We have tried to rally support for next weekend's trail work at CC, but were not a part of this week's work.
    Quote Originally Posted by jbt56
    Are you a whiny Marin liberal, or a hand-wringing Berkeley liberal?

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Piranha426 View Post
    Slide - no. We have tried to rally support for next weekend's trail work at CC, but were not a part of this week's work.
    any chance you could put up the details of next weekend's trail work?

  48. #48
    Like a boss.
    Reputation: Piranha426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by Davey Simon View Post
    Now condescending advocates can tell the locals what is good for them. They create a process where the locals are not even made aware of changes that will occur and when the changes begin we are told sorry you should have been to the meeting we held months ago while you were out of town. They truly believe they know what is best for us.
    As someone who spends an enormous proportion of my free time as an (unpaid!) advocate for cycling, I'd love to know what else I can do to help alert "locals" (Who I guess have to be born here or something? I've worked in Marin for almost 10 years, rode here for 7, and lived here for almost 4, when do I get my "locals" card?) about changes to trails. I would honestly (no snark) love to know how we can make the process better for people, even though we have pretty much NO SAY in the development of that process. We post/send e-mails/make hay on Facebook about every single meeting. We post/send e-mails/make hay on Facebook about writing letters. We post/send e-mails/make hay on Facebook about advertised trail work days. We ride and ride and ride and talk with other riders that we encounter. We ask ourselves and other riders what they want to see. We spend too much time on forums like this. In terms of defining "what's best for us" (as if you can really know such a thing), how the hell else are we supposed to know what people want? Am I supposed to "have ESPN or something?!?"

    Advocates are generally not made aware in advance about the details of trail maintenance, unless it's the kind of maintenance for which volunteer labor is helpful/required. FOCC is primarily functioning as a funding vehicle for China Camp. They are not, and cannot, do anything that CSP would not or cannot do on its own. Neither FOCC nor CSP has any obligation (let alone history) of alerting trail advocates when they are going to do work that significantly changes the nature of a trail (unless that work falls under the purview of CEQA or some other regulatory process - hey, did you know that for the past two years, CSP has developed a state-wide programmatic EIR for proposed trail use changes? And that the public has had multiple opportunities for input to that EIR, all of which have been advertised here on MTBR?!?). The sanitation of the root rut on Bay View was most likely something CSP wanted to do well before FOCC began acting in the fiduciary interest of the park; FOCC just provided the funds to finally do it. But this was hardly some conspiracy by FOCC and local bike advocates to piss off "intermediate and advanced riders."

    As for why CSP wanted to sanitize the trail, and why they decided to do it the way they did - who knows. I don't. The advocacy community will follow up with both CSP and FOCC, and do our best to communicate what it means when these kinds of actions are implemented without the input of the local cycling community. But, damn, I don't know what else to tell people when these things happen. We do our best. We show up. We write letters. We make our opinions (and the opinions of the people we meet) known. But no one has to ask us for permission to do anything - like, really, ANYTHING - so I don't really see how it's our fault when things happen that people don't like.
    Quote Originally Posted by jbt56
    Are you a whiny Marin liberal, or a hand-wringing Berkeley liberal?

  49. #49
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,732
    If you own the land, personally, you can make the trails you want.

    If someone friendly to Mtb owns the land you might get the trails you want.

    If someone else who is not friendly to Mtb owns the land.....you are at their mercy.

    A park civically owned set up to serve the public will develop to serve everyone.

    What we want as Mtb trails are very different from trails mandated by general plans. The only reason the trails in China Camp were the way they were is that the Park could not manage to change them, not because they thought it was good for Mtb. As soon as the resources were found the trails were brought in line with predetermined standards. If we are honest, there are a fair number of riders who found those trails a joke, anyhow, which begs the definition of "what mountain bikers want," in the first place.

    I'm afraid that the idea that we have much influence over what the trails will be like in a State Park may simply be mistaken. At best the trails which cannot be effected by maintenance come closest to what some find somewhat acceptable.

    So in a Socratic effort what, then, can we expect to effect in a civic park?
    I don't rattle.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by Piranha426 View Post

    As for why CSP wanted to sanitize the trail, and why they decided to do it the way they did - who knows. I don't. The advocacy community will follow up with both CSP and FOCC, and do our best to communicate what it means when these kinds of actions are implemented without the input of the local cycling community. But, damn, I don't know what else to tell people when these things happen. We do our best. We show up. We write letters. We make our opinions (and the opinions of the people we meet) known. But no one has to ask us for permission to do anything - like, really, ANYTHING - so I don't really see how it's our fault when things happen that people don't like.
    A MCBC rep told me yesterday the motivation for that sanitization was safety b/c there had supposedly been numerous injuries there.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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