Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,511

    Deadline Dec. 4 ! Tell the State to support streamlining the trails process!

    Some weeks ago one of us posted a thread about the State Parks reviewing its guiding docs. A part of it reworked the process for modifying, converting, and building trails.The PEIR (Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Road and Trail Change-in-Use Evaluation Process) places environmental issues at the beginning of the process. It sets up a situation where if we meet the environmental considerations from the get-go when we apply for development, the haters can't use the boonoggle of Environmental Impact Reports, their time and cost, to confound and halt us.

    There are those who have seen this PEIR and cried that it makes it too easy for mountain bikers to get trails. These folks can stop us if they want and they will if we don't act. We need to let the State know that we support this new program. I have listed here some issues one might use to comment and a place to send the letter. IMBA has made it easy to comment with a ink on their site. Either way we must act now as the deadline is Tuesday, December 4. Go here for the IMBA online feature:

    Submit Your Comments to California State Parks | International Mountain Bicycling Association


    If you would like to be more elaborate here is the information of which I spoke:


    Here are a few suggested response topics:

    1. Thank CSP for the opportunity to make comments.

    2. We appreciate the major steps that CSP has taken to promote multi-use trails. We urge you to use the PEIR to provide much needed trail opportunities for cyclists.

    3. We welcome the acknowledgement that there are effective “tools” and methods to successfully manage multi-use trails.

    4. We appreciate the in depth study of trail use conflict that shows that after more than 30 years of mountain bike trails use, and millions of trail user’s encounters, complaints are few, incidents are fewer, and accidents are rare.

    5. The trail conversion analysis may prove to be cumbersome and time consuming and may lead to expensive trail alterations. Therefore it is important to point out that there are hundreds of trails in parks that have never been specifically altered for multi-use, yet they have functioned adequately for years. Care must be exercised in the conversion analysis to prevent the over engineering of trails to account for every potential form of user behavior.

    6. The report references a State Code (P.4.14-3) that limits development in parks that would be considered “Attractions in themselves”. The Code was intended to limit the construction of restaurants, amusement parks, athletic fields, etc. in park units. It is poor analysis to apply this code to trails. Trails are much more than just a transportation system. Trails that are sustainable, blended to the natural environment (sinuosity) and designed to showcase the park’s natural features should be enjoyed as such. They are works of art that compliment the sense of place. People come to parks to enjoy the trails.

    We need to you pull a communication together and send it or Fax can to:

    Environmental Coordinator
    California Department of Parks & Recreation, Northern Service Center
    One Capitol Mall, Suite 410
    Sacramento, CA 95814.
    Fax: 916-445-9081 (subject line: Statewide Trails).


    Or email responses to:

    CEQANSC@parks.ca.gov (Subject line: Statewide Trails). Comments should be submitted no later than December 4.

    Or go here to use the IMBA form. It’s quick and easy:

    Submit Your Comments to California State Parks | International Mountain Bicycling Association
    I don't rattle.

  2. #2
    Is now still the time?
    Reputation: Sorcerer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    902
    Comments to the CSP are worth making. Looking ahead, once this PEIR is ratified in some form, I believe the CSP will release a new Trails Handbook. There must a draft of the new Trails Handbook somewhere, but it is not being made public or available for comment. Actual trail codes will be presented as non-negotiable. But should that be the case? Whatever the answer is, the fact is that the PEIR rests one of it's feet on trail construction standards. Questioning this may be a point worth making to the CSP regarding the PEIR.

    I venture that the new Trails Handbook, in addition to graphic updates to old content, will contain new sections on road to trail conversions, more details on restoration , and ways to design, site, and construct features to control mountain bike velocity.

    The Trail Handbook will not satisfy the tastes of modern mountain bikers.

    For contrast, here is the slim document which the PEIR will succeed:

    http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/980/fi...nuse_draft.pdf
    Last edited by Sorcerer; 12-02-2012 at 01:01 AM.
    SOrCerer

  3. #3
    Ride Responsibly
    Reputation: LWright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,945
    For those looking for something simpler to send, feel free to borrow from my response, just remove the LOBO references.
    email to; CEQANSC@parks.ca.gov

    December 2, 2012

    Attn; Environmental Coordinator
    California Department of Parks & Recreation, Northern Service Center
    Statewide Trails PEIR
    California State Parks (CSP) has released the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Road and Trail Change-in-Use Evaluation Process (PEIR). This document addresses the environmental considerations when considering the addition or removal of a trail user type on existing trails.

    The Lake Oroville Bicyclists Organization (LOBO) wishes to thank CSP for the opportunity to make comments.
    LOBO is a 501 © 7 non-profit organization founded in 1996.

    LOBO has been an advocate for multi-use trails and has seen first hand the abuse of the CEQA process by opponents to multi-use of existing trails.

    Description of the Proposed Project:
    California State Parks (CSP) proposes to implement the Road and Trail Change-in-Use Evaluation Process (Process) throughout the State Park System. The Process is intended to comprehensively evaluate potential road and trail change-in-use proposals in CSP units, facilitate the review of those proposals in park units statewide. Off-highway motor vehicle recreation (OHMVR) areas are not covered under the Process. The Process provides CSP with an objective and systematic approach for making decisions regarding the addition or removal of non-motorized uses of a State Park System road or trail.

    “The Process provides CSP with an objective and systematic approach for making decisions regarding the addition or removal of non-motorized uses of a State Park System road or trail.”

    LOBO supports and approves the California State Parks Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Road and Trail Change-in-Use Evaluation Process.

    Sincerely,
    Lyle Wright
    Lake Oroville Bicyclists Organization Trails Advocate

Posting Permissions

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