Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 220
  1. #101
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Eloquent analysis...

    Quote Originally Posted by ElHombre View Post
    The myth of Sisyphus comes to mind... Zeus err DPR/CSP punishing a man/mountain biker for his perceived hubris by making him perform absurd labor, over and over. Camus wrote a great essay about it; looks like the fine folks at CSP have found some inspiration reading...
    ...perhaps 3000 years from now the "Saga of the Jim Donnelly Trail" (or the "Myth of the Two Paul's" ?) will be being discussed in philosophy classes.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Uncle Stinky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    546
    I have never ridden here but always wanted to. I just gave this a quick read through and it looks like the park service cut a huge branch off the beautiful old oak rather than put in a go around! It makes me sick to my stomach that they would do something like that.

  3. #103
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Thanks...

    Quote Originally Posted by M3ichael View Post
    Thanks for the update Paul and all the blood, sweat and maybe a tear or two you've put into the JDT and Coe.

    IMHO the DPR to streamline "Change in Use Policy" is important enough to get some MTBers to come back to Coe and volunteer again.

    Michael
    ...Michael; we'll put you down on the "maybe" list!
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SallySalamander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    27
    I secretly filmed a video of the DPR supervised trail work at Coe, with a staring role by Ranger Stuart Organo

    Looking for love amongst the Banana Slugs

  5. #105
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,955
    You guys are impressive. I would have given up a while back, and just kept riding the trail as is.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    Most gratifying to see humor being applied as this is a really hilarious situation.

    Since the disappointments began in March staff are distant and uncommunicative. Perhaps they are afraid of something. That cannot can be the case. They are courageous law enforcement officers.

    Ostensibly all we are waiting for is rain to make the soil workable. The amount of work I'm anticipating we are expected to complete will need the best conditions, or it won't be possible without a number of seasons, or an army of brutes.

    You might conclude that we are digging our own grave by working the trail to death. That's because if the trail gets done how the CSP dictates, they will then hold it out as an example of how all the trails in Coe are supposed to be, and then seeing that the rest of the trails lack this "quality", close the rest of them down. Wouldn't that be nauseating?

    So why proceed?

    Here's a possibility: Change In Use Policy

    The JDT could be purposed to exhibit the qualities that the CSP aspires for a modern multi-use trail. The CSP's declared reliance upon pinch-points and out-slope and upon a monotonous trail topology could be imposed upon the trail and used as an example.

    One reason for the bland trail standards could be to discourage enthusiastic mountain bike use. On the other hand, easy climbing and low risk trails will enable a wider cross-section of society to successfully try and continue to mountain bike.

    At what point do pinch-points get called out as dangerous traps for cyclists? Perhaps when the first novice gets seriously hurt because of one. Wouldn't it be convenient for CSP if a volunteer could be made a scapegoat for such a feature?

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459

    ReBenching

    If the work involves redoing a perfectly good bench I will not be there.

    If the Trail Supervisor is there I will not be there.

    Let me know when you will actually be doing some viable work.

    EDIT:
    I think moving forward my policy will be every time The Super puts together a re-bench party I will go out and do non-DPR Trail work. The world needs balance.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by SallySalamander View Post
    I secretly filmed a video of the DPR supervised trail work at Coe, with a staring role by Ranger Stuart Organo


    Nice to see you back Sally.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    Tahoe BC and mudncrud, you both show good judgement of the situation.

    That said, all of the switchbacks and climbing turns below the picnic table still need finish work. At a minimum, I would like to get these turns drainage into a more functional state before bigger rains arrive. That and more could have been accomplished by now.

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    Paul's your work is not appreciated by the DPR, please put your energy elsewhere where it is.

    I'll even commit to a brushing day or two if don't work on it
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,126

    Just stupid, and bad management to boot

    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    Yes, as far as the work the "2nd Saturday" gang does; we start at the bottom and build out to the CSP formerly known as the DPR Class One trails standard. (up to the picnic bench)

    Sorcerer and I expect that this work will consume most of this season given that it's projected that the majority of previous MTB volunteers will not wish to take part. (Prolly 80% of the work on the JDT has been done by MTBers) I don't blame you guys that hold off; I've conceded that we've lost this battle but I see this as enabling us to continue the war on other fronts (trails!) We might be wrong on this...

    ....

    As things now stand, until the JDT is completed to CSP formerly known as the DPR satisfaction there will be no other trail projects for us volunteers to work on at Coe. (especially new trails)
    As someone who had to manage volunteers and volunteer groups art of my last job, this isn't a good way to go. As you've noted, this decision by park management will cause them to lose a great many volunteers. I'm stating the obvious, but volunteers donate their time and labor to something they believe in and believe that their efforts make a difference.

    A key to maximizing volunteer projects and efforts is to have a menu of projects, and to be open to new project ideas if they fit in with overall needs and goals. With a backlog of needed work at coe as well as most state parks, it would be foolish to turn down volunteer help because one person has decided that a single project trumps all the rest.

    As to Sorcerer's comment about staff being "distant" since this situation developed, my guess is they got a royal chewing out from a higher up in state parks, likely the person who didn't like the work that had been done. Civil service jobs aren't as secure as partisan rhetoric might lead one to believe.

  12. #112
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,955
    So, is there somebody that the community can complain to at State Parks?
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    I rode Mission Peak yesterday. After the rain, the Mission Peak trails (actually, mostly fire roads there, as is true on most EBRPD properties) and the tiny bit of singletrack are in fine shape to be worked on (although the singletrack trail maintenance schedule in most of EBRPD seems to be about once every 30 years, as compared to weekly at the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority, so it's a moot point as far as Mission Peak goes). There is a legal half-mile singletrack section at MP and it would be in prime shape for fixing up. So Jim Donnelly may well be the same, especially after more rain this morning.

  14. #114
    trail rat
    Reputation: slocaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,814
    Quote Originally Posted by HarryCallahan View Post
    As to Sorcerer's comment about staff being "distant" since this situation developed, my guess is they got a royal chewing out from a higher up in state parks, likely the person who didn't like the work that had been done. Civil service jobs aren't as secure as partisan rhetoric might lead one to believe.
    Not likely, the issues in Coe are local egos. I know most of the trail "higher ups" in State Parks in Sacramento and they would not be doing that.

    We were some of the conference attendees who took the course where they developed the program for the new Change of Use process at the CA Trails and Greenways Conference in 2010 to support the statewide Programmatic Environmental Impact Report. The pre-conference session was done again this year by Steve Musillami & Karl Knapp, they and others have stated that the long range goal of the Change of Use Program is to make as many trails as possible into multiuse trails. The PEIR is to thwart the logjam lawsuits that get filed to stop projects.

    Volunteer groups working with State Parks in SLO County, in the LA area (Santa Monica Mountains in particular), also in the Auburn area have an entirely different relationship with the Sector personnel in that area. I know this from friends who lead volunteer groups in those areas.

    We have a massive trail reroute project in Montana de Oro State Park that is the first trail project where the Change of Use was applied, and mountain bikes will have access to trails where they were banned 25 years ago, when the project is complete.
    "The physician heals, Nature makes well" - real fortune cookie

    CCCMB trail work for trail access - SLO, CA

  15. #115
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Not totally local...

    Quote Originally Posted by slocaus View Post
    Not likely, the issues in Coe are local egos. I know most of the trail "higher ups" in State Parks in Sacramento and they would not be doing that.

    We were some of the conference attendees who took the course where they developed the program for the new Change of Use process at the CA Trails and Greenways Conference in 2010 to support the statewide Programmatic Environmental Impact Report. The pre-conference session was done again this year by Steve Musillami & Karl Knapp, they and others have stated that the long range goal of the Change of Use Program is to make as many trails as possible into multiuse trails. The PEIR is to thwart the logjam lawsuits that get filed to stop projects.

    Volunteer groups working with State Parks in SLO County, in the LA area (Santa Monica Mountains in particular), also in the Auburn area have an entirely different relationship with the Sector personnel in that area. I know this from friends who lead volunteer groups in those areas.

    We have a massive trail reroute project in Montana de Oro State Park that is the first trail project where the Change of Use was applied, and mountain bikes will have access to trails where they were banned 25 years ago, when the project is complete.
    Some points:
    The "no new trails" in the case of Coe was said to have come from beyond the Gavilan Sector or the Monterey District. That's what our Sector and District Staff has told us. In other words, Sacramento.

    Also; much of the Auburn area has to do with SRA's (not SP's); a whole different set of guidelines I've been told.

    I've marveled at what you guy's are accomplishing around SLO-town; I just hope the other foot doesn't drop and that what you've been "accomplishing" doesn't turn into "what we got away with". At Coe, it changed for us overnight.

    A major danger that I see to MTBing in the PEIR is the reliance on the out-dated CSP Trails Handbook; it can be widely interpreted---as we found out the hard way on Coe's JDT.

    As stated (and I'll use quotes since copying may be a no-no) in Chapter 16 section 16.2 "Specifications for multiple use trails including mountain bikes more closely match trail designs for equestrians and Class I hiking trails"

    Fine; I could live with that---Class I trail being "...minimum of 36 inches wide with a preferred width of 48 inches." (page 1-2) A wide single-track but OK...

    But; going back to Chapter 16 we've got this paragraph:
    "Tread Width - Trail tread widths of 60 inches allows for passing of two user groups on the trail surface. Such trail bed should be constructed to 8 feet to accommodate associated drainage structures. A full bench cut is required unless the fill slope material will support the bicycle wheel without sloughing or entrenching. Cross slope of trail bed shall provide proper sheet drainage. Narrower widths of trail may be appropriate, particularly if turnouts are provided, and/or types of uses restricted."

    We (I???) mostly did work on the JDT with the"Narrower widths of trail may be appropriate, particularly if turnouts are provided, and/or..." provision in mind. Local Staff has taken exception to this as they originally wanted the the JDT to be an impossible 6'~8' wide. The compromise in the approved PEF is a 48" wide full-bench which we are going to have to finish the trail to except in some very specific locations where the trail may be as narrow as 28".

    Why don't you give Karl a call a tell him the trouble we're having!?!?
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,126

    Cool-blue Rhythm

    Quote Originally Posted by slocaus View Post
    Not likely, the issues in Coe are local egos. I know most of the trail "higher ups" in State Parks in Sacramento and they would not be doing that.
    ....
    .

    I wasn't thinking Sacramento - not that high. But Pliebenberg's post is interesting, and he's in a better place to know than I. I'm just drawing on my experience in working in another state agency, as well as having contacts in other gov't dept.s. It's amazing what a chill someone can put on you indirectly if you speak out of turn or inadvertently cross someone else's agenda

    I know you are doing good stuff there in SLO and that's a good thing. I'm thinking here that as the saying goes: "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    620
    Just read this epic and subscribed! Wow.
    I work with State Parks (Sierra District) on trails stuff often. Cool to see Karl K's name. We laid out some sections of the Donner Lake Rim Trail almost 15 years ago! He was also very helpful in keeping a local trail around in Truckee.

    Sorry to digress...

    PS that CSP trails manual needs an updating for sure!!!!

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    In some large proportion the lack of communication is due in great part to staff needing to take all of their leave, scheduling, and perhaps to a small degree the $54 million scandal. This in itself is another issue, but all of the local staff has had to burn up their accrued time off. In the regular world vacations are scheduled so that the work continues. But from what I've seen, when someone leaves, work just piles up or isn't done, at the CSP.

    We just had a park association meeting last night, of which the JDT was not really a focus. However, good communications happened. Our moods have cooled, and we are thinking about moving the main focus trail days to Sundays because our main staff oversight person, the backcountry ranger, is off on Saturdays.

    Rain has quickened our enthusiasm. The switchbacks are not properly finished, and need to be, in order to function properly this winter.

  19. #119
    trail rat
    Reputation: slocaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,814
    There is nothing that gets the notice of State Parks staff more than when you can rally 150-200 volunteers and GET TRAIL WORK DONE. That boosts your credibility tremendously, especially when they remember that a volunteer hour is valued at $24.18 (CA 2010 Value of Volunteer Time | Independent Sector), so 150 volunteers for four hours is $14,508. Give them that four times a year, and that it too much FREE work dollars to ignore.

    What you need more than anything is huge numbers of volunteers to show the State Parks staff that mountain bikers want something bad enough to work for it, to donate almost $100 of free work for half a day, once a month.

    You guys are dedicated and committed, good on ya. Here is hoping that it gets better and easier, and that so many who post here show up to help you. Our work here in SLO is much easier, due in part to the fact that CCCMB rallied 6,784 volunteer hours last season for our SLO County land managers, at a value of $164,037.
    "The physician heals, Nature makes well" - real fortune cookie

    CCCMB trail work for trail access - SLO, CA

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorcerer View Post
    In some large proportion the lack of communication is due in great part to staff needing to take all of their leave, scheduling, and perhaps to a small degree the $54 million scandal. This in itself is another issue, but all of the local staff has had to burn up their accrued time off. In the regular world vacations are scheduled so that the work continues. But from what I've seen, when someone leaves, work just piles up or isn't done, at the CSP.
    .
    In the regular world we either do not get vacations or we spend at least half our vacation working.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  21. #121
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    I'm glad things are...

    Quote Originally Posted by slocaus View Post
    There is nothing that gets the notice of State Parks staff more than when you can rally 150-200 volunteers and GET TRAIL WORK DONE. That boosts your credibility tremendously, especially when they remember that a volunteer hour is valued at $24.18 (CA 2010 Value of Volunteer Time | Independent Sector), so 150 volunteers for four hours is $14,508. Give them that four times a year, and that it too much FREE work dollars to ignore.

    What you need more than anything is huge numbers of volunteers to show the State Parks staff that mountain bikers want something bad enough to work for it, to donate almost $100 of free work for half a day, once a month.

    You guys are dedicated and committed, good on ya. Here is hoping that it gets better and easier, and that so many who post here show up to help you. Our work here in SLO is much easier, due in part to the fact that CCCMB rallied 6,784 volunteer hours last season for our SLO County land managers, at a value of $164,037.
    ...so rosy in SLO!

    I'm not sure about the Monterey District in total but at H W Coe SP alone volunteers log around 20,000 hours yearly. I don't have access to the hard numbers but I'd say that the JDT project has received at least 3500 hours (hell I've put in 400 hours myself) of volunteer effort.

    The CSP is well aware of this and we receive frequent accolades from local Staff.

    There's another way that 20,000 (or whatever) hours needs to be considered, sure those hours represent nearly a half-million $$$ to the State's benefit, but they also represent displacing 20,000 hours of employment for CSP workers.

    Putting it bluntly; we're costing State workers their jobs.

    If actions speak louder than words; that's part of the story being told in our situation.

    Also; some of the local Staff flat out don't trust us doing trail work, I'm not very optimistic that we'll ever get that trust back. (What we build looks too much like a trail bicyclists would enjoy!)

    So, after half a year of no progress at all on the JDT, we finally (as of just yesterday) have a tentative date to resume volunteer work (in the presence of paid CSP Staff)---Saturday November 10th.

    We will start a fresh thread on MTBR when the time gets closer.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  22. #122
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,955
    Sounds like a job protection issue.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  23. #123
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    evil chuckle

    Quote Originally Posted by mudncrud View Post
    I think moving forward my policy will be every time The Super puts together a re-bench party I will go out and do non-DPR Trail work. The world needs balance.
    My plan is working!

    And remember; it's the "CSP" now---the "R" in "DPR" stood for Recreation (and we can't have any of that!)
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  24. #124
    trail rat
    Reputation: slocaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,814
    That is a major difference here, In the CASP Coastal Sector, there are two full time and four part time people on the ground who maintain MdO and Morro Bay SP, doing basic repairs, mowing, cleaning bathrooms, etc. They have had no one doing trail work for at least five years, and summer temps used to brush the hiker only trails, but no temp hires now for over a year.

    The office staff works 12 hour days, trying to do 1 1/2 to 2 jobs, since they are understaffed, and the budget means no more employees.

    CCCMB provides work that would never get done vs displacing CASP workers. We are not competition to the CASP, but a free resource that they appreciate and use.
    "The physician heals, Nature makes well" - real fortune cookie

    CCCMB trail work for trail access - SLO, CA

  25. #125
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Believe it or not...

    Quote Originally Posted by mudncrud View Post
    In the regular world we either do not get vacations or we spend at least half our vacation working.
    ...most of the Staff I've talked to would rather not be forced into taking their vacation time. I can only guess as to why this has been ordered; from an accounting perspective the hours represent dollars (that can't be spent by the CSP) that inflate the Budget. Getting rid of those dollars make the CSP look even more "broke". (Which is a good thing come election time; think Prop 30)

    Also; it conceptually "spreads work around"---unfortunately, a Maintenance Worker can't do the work of a Ranger or vise versa. Mutter, mutter...
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  26. #126
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    It's not just the CSP...

    Quote Originally Posted by slocaus View Post
    The office staff works 12 hour days, trying to do 1 1/2 to 2 jobs, since they are understaffed, and the budget means no more employees.
    Endemic of poor management practices in bureaucracies everywhere; they'll pay overtime (I'm assuming office staff is not donating their time) by deferring monies from elsewhere but they won't do the right thing and provide adequate staffing levels. (or proper office automation?)

    Are you listening Jerry? (our Governor)
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  27. #127
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,955
    Frankly, the fact that public employees can accrue vacations for ever is a complete abuse of the system. None of us can do that in the private sector. Use it or lose it.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,126
    Quote Originally Posted by zorg View Post
    Frankly, the fact that public employees can accrue vacations for ever is a complete abuse of the system. None of us can do that in the private sector. Use it or lose it.

    I think it varies by agency and organization. I used to work for the UC system. You could accrue up to 2 years vacation, and then you topped out, were forced to take vacation days as they accrued.

    The challenge is, you still have to get your vacation approved by supervision, and if your unit is short-staffed, either your vacation gets turned down or your work doesn't get done while you are out. I could see both these latter things happening in state parks.

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    In my public agency, we can accrue 400 hours of vacation time (10 weeks) but then it's the same thing: use it or don't accumulate any more. At least that's what I've been told.

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,126
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    Endemic of poor management practices in bureaucracies everywhere; they'll pay overtime (I'm assuming office staff is not donating their time) by deferring monies from elsewhere but they won't do the right thing and provide adequate staffing levels. (or proper office automation?)
    Those are some good observations. I would note that given the cost of benefits, someone can rack up quite a bit of OT, whether in the public or private sector, before it makes sense to hire another permanent employee. Also, some staff is not hourly. Even low leveled managers can be salaried, and your work day ends up being as long as it needs to be. I don't know if state parks operates like that, but UC does. I had colleagues who were quite cynical about the "raise" they got with a promotion.

    But enough of the thread hi-jack. The whole situation with the JDT really sucks. I'm wondering if it might take someone outside state parks to clean it up. It would be very interesting if slocaus and pliebenberg could both sit down with a state auditor or someone in the legislature who is on the right committee and pro parks and share their very different experiences.

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    I would think it better to get the trail built and let the state parks bureaucracy forget about it shortly afterward. Unless, of course, the park rangers sit there like the overseer in Cool Hand Luke and tell the volunteers they've got a failure to communicate . . . cool hand luke - YouTube

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I would think it better to get the trail built and let the state parks bureaucracy forget about it shortly afterward. Unless, of course, the park rangers sit there like the overseer in Cool Hand Luke and tell the volunteers they've got a failure to communicate . . . cool hand luke - YouTube
    That is basically what is happening. Last trail work day the Trail Supervisor basically stood there and said you will move that four foot bench four feet the side. Yes, I know there is a large granite boulder there but that does not matter, move the trail.

    That is when I decided I would never work for that kid again.

    That along with what they did to Ichabod Tree. That stuff is just nonsense. I will make it a point to do trail work. But will not work for the Trail Sup or the Parks Sup unless there are some significant changes. They lost my support and I can easily clean JDT how it sits.

    Long Live the Underground.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  33. #133
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    With Photoshop...

    Quote Originally Posted by mudncrud View Post
    That is basically what is happening. Last trail work day the Trail Supervisor basically stood there and said you will move that four foot bench four feet the side. Yes, I know there is a large granite boulder there but that does not matter, move the trail.

    That is when I decided I would never work for that kid again.

    That along with what they did to Ichabod Tree. That stuff is just nonsense. I will make it a point to do trail work. But will not work for the Trail Sup or the Parks Sup unless there are some significant changes. They lost my support and I can easily clean JDT how it sits.

    Long Live the Underground.
    Photobucket
    ...it would be too easy to paste a shotgun in place of the McLeod into this photo---I would do it but I have better things to be doing. Besides; the "kid" with his back to the camera (Jim or Tim I forget who) actually did move some dirt that day. For all we know they may have been under orders not to work with the inmates uh err volunteers.

    BTW; that's mudworm and mudncrud next up the trail.

    Photobucket
    But most of the day(s) did look like this; that's Tim and Jim (or Jim and Tim) giving orders to the head "trustee" (VOCal's Craig F) while mudworm leans in to eavesdrop.

    Again, these guys may have had orders not to join in; they were there for oversight and the need for a CSP Staff member with EMT certification to be present. Ya don't see ambulance drivers doing much at events do you? (unless somebody gets hurt of course)

    AND; these guys probably don't work weekends on a regular basis (and they prolly would have loved to drink the beer we offered them later but had to turn down because they were still "on-duty")
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    Perhaps I am being a bit harsh on Jim and Tim and I did see one of them work for about 15 minutes then go sit and talk with the other for about an hour or so.

    I realize he is taking orders. But, the way I look at it is, he carried out the orders so he can take ownership for his handi work. He may be a swell guy to have a beer with, doubt that I will ever know.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    Off topic, but I rode at Coe today and discovered that the top of Cross Canyon Trail south of Coit Road and down to Cattle Duster and Grapevine has been rerouted. Who did that work and when? It's nice.

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: r3r3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    58
    I haven't checked this thread before, but I knew the work was going on and thought that everything was going well. So, I was surprised last month when I happened to be out at the Dowdy Ranch center and heard otherwise. The volunteer (a very nice former ranger) told us that unauthorized trail structures had been installed on the JDT and it had been closed until the issued could be resolved. What?

    After seeing the pictures, I am rather upset. None of these features would be called structures in my opinion (I was thinking of double jumps, wood ladders, teeter-totters, etc.) Then, reading through the thread I can see the unmovable obstacle that bureaucracy has handed the hard working volunteers. Build it EXACTLY this way, or we will shut the trail and make an example of you lawless mountain bikers! This is not what anyone wants, but it is their policy. Not fun, not nice, but we all have to deal with it. I wish it were different, and that mountain bikers had as much of a voice as the hiking/equestrian crowd, but the tide has yet to turn...

    Hopefully this will all get sorted out when trail work begins again in November. I'd like to see the new trail when it is completed. Last time I was out there, I rode up Anza/Jackson and back down Domino Pond/Cattle Duster/Grapevine (with an unnecessary long detour to Kelly Lake). I don't get out that way often, but I am looking forward to the finished JDT product when it is completed. It looks like all of you have been doing a lot of great work out there. I'm really impressed with your dedication and willingness to see this project through, regardless of the bureaucratic hassles.

  37. #137
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Re-routed!?!?

    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    Off topic, but I rode at Coe today and discovered that the top of Cross Canyon Trail south of Coit Road and down to Cattle Duster and Grapevine has been rerouted. Who did that work and when? It's nice.
    Photos???

    When was the last time you rode it? A long time ago?

    I'm not aware of any recent work but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened---I'll go check it out.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  38. #138
    trail rat
    Reputation: slocaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,814
    Quote Originally Posted by r3r3r View Post
    I'm really impressed with your dedication and willingness to see this project through, regardless of the bureaucratic hassles.
    Every trail building group will tell you that IS what it takes to get new mtb trails built.
    "The physician heals, Nature makes well" - real fortune cookie

    CCCMB trail work for trail access - SLO, CA

  39. #139
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Trumped up charges...

    Quote Originally Posted by r3r3r View Post
    The volunteer (a very nice former ranger) told us that unauthorized trail structures had been installed on the JDT and it had been closed until the issued could be resolved. What?
    It rather burns my ass that this info is still circulating; the Ranger who shut us down embellished the situation on the JDT so he could justify his harsh actions.

    When the District Trails Spvr saw those "structures" he had a chuckle which made me feel a little better. ("..structures? I wouldn't call those structures---maybe features ...")

    Probably the "structure" that caused us the most grief was where we (perhaps "I" as it was my idea) split the trail so horses could avoid the low limbs of "Icabod's Oak". Boy oh boy what a lesson learned!
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    Photos???

    When was the last time you rode it? A long time ago?

    I'm not aware of any recent work but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened---I'll go check it out.
    I thought I'd ridden it within the last few months, but maybe it's been between six months and a year. The work doesn't look recent. I have a feeling it's me.

    It used to be that you went south on Cross Canyon for 0.1 mile south of Coit Road, and then dropped straight down an old fire road (usually overgrown) to Coit Springs Trail (?) if I'm remembering the name correctly. Now there's a branch there to signal that it's closed. You turn left (east) and down a very narrow singletrack to the point where you get to the serpentine rock feature on Coit Springs (?). Maybe that trail was always there but I was missing it on each ride.

    Heading out the door now for a ride (already late) but will check back later on this thread!

  41. #141
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Same trail, new (ish) sign.

    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I thought I'd ridden it within the last few months, but maybe it's been between six months and a year. The work doesn't look recent. I have a feeling it's me.

    It used to be that you went south on Cross Canyon for 0.1 mile south of Coit Road, and then dropped straight down an old fire road (usually overgrown) to Coit Springs Trail (?) if I'm remembering the name correctly. Now there's a branch there to signal that it's closed. You turn left (east) and down a very narrow singletrack to the point where you get to the serpentine rock feature on Coit Springs (?). Maybe that trail was always there but I was missing it on each ride.

    Heading out the door now for a ride (already late) but will check back later on this thread!
    OK; that explains it; the re-route has been there for a fair bit (8 years?)---the signs are newer. (a year old?) I think there's even mention of their installation on that "Pliny's Missing Marker Contest" thread if you care to look it up.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374

    Trail work to resume

    PRA Event


    Title:
    Fall Trail Day -- Jim Donnelly Trail
    When:
    November 10, 2012 9:00AM - 3:00PM
    Where:
    Hunting Hollow Entrance and Parking Lot -
    Category:
    Lending a Hand
    Description

    We will work on the realignment of the Jim Donnelly Trail accessed from Hunting Hollow gate. This is a great new multi-use trail that is becoming popular with all users. It's a 3.5 mile trail that starts right across from the first Hunting Hollow creek crossing. It provides a sustainable 10% grade trail all the way up to Steer Ridge Road.

    We'll do trail work rain or shine. It's been dry for a long time, the ground is hard, and conditions will be dusty. We'll focus on widening the trail in the bottom one mile section up to the picnic table.

    We will be working with McLeods, Pick-mattocks, shovels, rakes, loppers, and hand saws. Instruction on safe tool use will be provided.

    We'll meet at the Hunting Hollow Parking Lot at 9AM to organize teams, hand out tools and walk to the work sites. We'll work until 3PM, with a noon time lunch break all together along the trail.

    You will be expected to sign a liability release to participate in this activity. Participants under age of 18 will be required to provide a Parental/Guardian Permission for Juveniles Consent Form.

    Plan on wearing sturdy boots, long trousers and bring work gloves if you have them. Bring a lunch and water.

    Thanks for being willing to help, we're looking forward to a great day in this beautiful park.

    Please contact Paul Nam (email vocinam@yahoo.com) to express your interest in volunteering for this trailwork activity.

    Venue

    Venue:
    Hunting Hollow Entrance and Parking Lot
    Description



    The Hunting Hollow entrance and parking lot is located on the south-west edge of the park on Gilroy Hot Springs Road north-east of Gilroy.

    The Hunting Hollow gate and parking area is open 24 hours a day, year round. You can arrive at the entrance and park any time of day or night. You can self-register for day use or backpacking. Be sure to take a park map with you when you head into the backcountry. You'll find free handout maps at the bulletin board in the parking area. You can also study a large park map stapled to the bulletin boards. Large maps are available for purchase on weekends when the parking area is staffed (in March through June).

    There are no car camping sites at the Hunting Hollow entrance.

    Dogs are not allowed beyond the Hunting Hollow entrance. See Dogs at Coe Park for more information.

    No drinking water is available at the Hunting Hollow entrance, so be sure to bring what you'll need.

    Getting There
    The Coe Park Hunting Hollow entrance is located on Gilroy Hot Springs Road, the same road you take to get to Coyote Reservoir.

    To get to the entrances, take Highway 101 to Gilroy (which is about 10 miles south of Morgan Hill and 25 miles south of San Jose). The distance from 101 to the Hunting Hollow entrance is about 9 miles.

    Take the Leavesley Road exit (County Road G9) and head east.

    After about 1.8 miles, turn left (north) on New Avenue; go a little over half a mile and then turn right (east) on Roop Road. About 3.3 miles up Roop Road, you'll pass the Coyote Reservoir Road on the left.

    The Hunting Hollow entrance is about 3.3 miles past the Coyote Reservoir Road turnoff.[

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Neela's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    200
    Just rode this trail again last weekend..I must say this is becoming one of my favorite trails really fast! It's a shame we're using volunteer hours to "fix" this trail rather than build more like it!

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: r3r3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    It rather burns my ass that this info is still circulating; the Ranger who shut us down embellished the situation on the JDT so he could justify his harsh actions.

    When the District Trails Spvr saw those "structures" he had a chuckle which made me feel a little better. ("..structures? I wouldn't call those structures---maybe features ...")

    Probably the "structure" that caused us the most grief was where we (perhaps "I" as it was my idea) split the trail so horses could avoid the low limbs of "Icabod's Oak". Boy oh boy what a lesson learned!
    If it helps any, I didn't really believe what he was saying. I think it is one of those things that he had heard from another member of the parks staff, and not directly experienced himself. That tends to amplify things that may already be misleading...

    I was glad to see the pictures and to get the true scoop here. I may need to re-read the thread, but is the IMBA or another local/regional advocacy group aware/involved with what is going on here? If this is coming from outside the district (Sacramento) it might be possible to get some help through lobbying the issue. Don't mean to shift the discussion topic, just wondering if anyone has tried to get help from the top down?

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by r3r3r View Post
    If it helps any, I didn't really believe what he was saying. I think it is one of those things that he had heard from another member of the parks staff, and not directly experienced himself. That tends to amplify things that may already be misleading...

    I was glad to see the pictures and to get the true scoop here. I may need to re-read the thread, but is the IMBA or another local/regional advocacy group aware/involved with what is going on here? If this is coming from outside the district (Sacramento) it might be possible to get some help through lobbying the issue. Don't mean to shift the discussion topic, just wondering if anyone has tried to get help from the top down?
    Speaking only for myself as someone on the fringes I think this would be good. The Paul's are doing what they can and are doing a very good job but it would be nice to have someone who can bring a bit more light to the subject, say some good words to someone that can create a positive influence.

    Ffive to ten years ago this would have been a non issue. Maybe it is the fact that a lot of work has been put in and Coe is starting to become a destination riding area and some folks a strugglng with the concept.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374

    Bonking ... not feelin' well Down and Dirty

    Hi,

    Here's an attempt to let some pressure out of this thread. Mountain biking is legit. I am a mountain biker. Trail building is simple, but not as simple as one might think. Codes, laws, policy, regulations, permissions, credentials, authorization, and the temerity to wade into all that, are not simple things.

    Here's me and a friend on the Cannell Trail up the hill from Kernville a couple of weekends ago demo-ing a bicycle:



    The photo above is taken in a National Forest. Notice that there are old and thick pine trunks or limbs the trail goes through. Notice, perhaps, that the trail is rocky and technical. Notice that this is a really good trail.

    Trails may seemingly appear like bacteria in a jam jar, or yeast in a wort. However, they develop from individuals who have made a choice to create them. People are like yeast. It is a concern that people might simply consume all the nutrition they can, and then turn tits up.

    We might not like it at all, or parts of it, but the regulations are there to the put brakes on development so as to reduce and discourage the chances of some misguided, even malevolent, or ignorantly damaging activity.

    The JDT and trails that might follow it in Coe are subject to CSP trail building code. At this time, not everything I, mudncrud or Pliebenberg would prefer in terms of trail, may be properly applied in State Park lands.

    Some of us have been described as an over-enthusiastic volunteers. Compliments like that are exceptional and are nice to hear about. But getting a trail built and officially blessed and open is another thing.

    This trail is going through.

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    Did a few laps on JD Sunday, it's clear it's one of the most popular trails in the park with all users. The welcome mat of horse crap to start with and the many horse shoe prints from the day before in both direction show's the Horse folks dig it, the half dozen bikers I saw Sunday were digging it, did not see any hikers but there foot prints were all over. Pretty sad you have to keep reworking a trail that's better than 99% of the other trails in Coe.

    Maybe I'll come out Saturday and see how many laps I can get in on JD while, just need to start working on a list of smart ass comments to direct towards Boss King each time I pass.

    In the spirit of Sally's video, here is another one that reminds me of the ongoing work going on JD.

    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374

    The Hill


  49. #149
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Smells like...

    Quote Originally Posted by syslesoppenia View Post
    michaelkorspace com/ ]michael kors wallet

    uggsoldesonlineoutlet com/products_all html ]ugg pour homme

    uggoutletstoreuk com/ ]ugg outlet orlando
    ...spam being fried?
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drew p's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    296
    Or if you want to work on a trail where mountain bikers make the decisions you can join us in Pogonip on Saturday. 9am at the bottom of U-Con. Paul N. you need to come visit sometime soon, my schedule is flexible, shoot me an email.

    Drew


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  51. #151
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,122
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    ...spam being fried?
    Please, do not quote spammers. There keywords in google results is what they want. Let admins clean them up.

  52. #152
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    point taken...

    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    Please, do not quote spammers. There keywords in google results is what they want. Let admins clean them up.
    ...but the mods are a bit slow at times. Plus did you notice that I was careful that there were no live links in what I quoted?

    I like quoting them at the same time as I report (!) them as sort of a "head on a pike" to serve notice that they shouldn't even bother spamming at MTBR.

    Perhaps a better solution would be to have the first 10 posts from a newbie member held-up until passed by the mods? (rather than the current restrictions)
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    Update. For the record I was fired the other week from the volunteer program at Henry W. Coe State Park for expressing my opinion. This happens just as my term as President of the park association ended. Nice to get a kick in the ass on my out!


  54. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374

    I might begin saying more

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorcerer View Post
    The Trails Handbook is copyrighted 1991.

    I'm a student in the Group 8 DPR Basic Trails Program. As far as I know, I'm the first volunteer to undergo this training (some of it is indoctrination). Typically DPR maintenance workers and skilled laborers and personnel from many agencies in the USA take this multi-week and multi-year course. My classmates are from State Parks, US Army Corp of Engineers, CCC, trail building groups, National Park Service, various county and city parks, and from other land management agencies like open space districts and water manageent agencies. Some Santa Clara County and Mid-peninsula Regional Open Space employees have attended this program.

    My training so far consists of two full weeks of curriculum. One week was spent in Big Sur last June, and the other in Pt Lobos last October.

    The point of this training is specifically to benefit the trails of Henry W Coe SP. I have actually made a detailed guide for the leading volunteers like Diesel and Paul with what I think are useful excerpts from this guidebook.

    A new handbook is forthcoming, and we may see it this year. The current handbook is a three ring loose-leaf binder with so many additional supplements, that they won't fit inside. There is some dated information and techniques inside. For example, inside are detailed descriptions of water bars (9.2.4). Water bars are not being installed anymore.

    There's a lot more I would like to say at some point.
    Now that I've been fired, for expressing opinions, I might start revealing some facts and stronger opinions that I had to hold back while I was a uniformed volunteer/unpaid DPR employee.



    One of the signs of progress in a different agency:


  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1
    Are there any newer post or discussions on this topic elsewhere? It's been over a year since this last post. Being a fairly new rider to the area I'm very curious on the current and future of Coe.

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    51
    Wow you got burned Sorcerer. Sorry to hear and thanks for the time you put in.

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    All the latest work on JD from my untrained eye also appears to be the location of the most erosion, fine examples of DPR STANDARDS!
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,297
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeBC View Post
    All the latest work on JD from my untrained eye also appears to be the location of the most erosion, fine examples of DPR STANDARDS!
    And I'm guessing that is where people tried to say "hey, that's a bad idea there"
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  59. #159
    Medium?
    Reputation: Fast Eddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,723
    It's where they decided to remove rolling grade (edit) dips that someone decided looked like jumps.
    Last edited by Fast Eddy; 04-08-2014 at 10:35 PM.

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    and why they now get a couple dozen volunteers a year instead of a month or week.
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  61. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Fast Eddy View Post
    It's where they decided to remove rolling grade reversals that someone decided looked like jumps.
    rolling grade reversals??? Don't those do silly things like stop water acceleration and such?
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  62. #162
    More pie please
    Reputation: Skyline35's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,648

    "There is no one available to run this trail work day"






    3rd or 4th postponement in a row...that's the current status of the trailwork program.

    ///Charlie

  63. #163
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    To clarify...

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyline35 View Post

    3rd or 4th postponement in a row...that's the current status of the trailwork program.

    ///Charlie
    The first 3 "postponements" were because staff decided that they could only do "supervision" one weekend a month, and the CMBP decided to defer to the TWD's that the MAU had scheduled (which BTW went on as scheduled with a good turnout)

    April's CMBP TWD was postponed because the only Uniformed Volunteer (me) willing to take on the JDT project has to drive a group back to the Rooster Comb for an all-day outing. Can't be 2 places at once...

    The CMBP 2nd Saturday TWD is "thumbs-up" for next month (May 10th)

    To further the discussion about State Park trail standards; the CSP is fine with "Grade Reversals" on trails in their park units; it's the "Rolling Grade Dips" (RGDs) that they take exception to.

    You can argue with them (I have) until you're blue in the face but they will not concede that a RGD is different than a purpose-constructed bike jump. We have to be content with "Drainage Knicks" for getting water off the trail. (Of course these need to be placed twice as often as RGDs and last 1/4 as long!)

    BTW; with enough Grade Reversals, RGDs are not really necessary IMHO.

    Berm turns? That's another can o'worms...
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  64. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    Hi,

    Happened to see this thread resurface while I visited this forum this morning to see how the threads on the Bell Built grant were going, and I thought about this quite a bit today. Most days I do not give a thought about Henry W. Coe anymore. I still love the place, and the volunteers though.

    My last photo on this thread shows me out of uniform and with a bandana across my mouth. I covered my mouth, because I did not want to post anything. Put a muzzle on it, to be careful.

    Well I'm past that stage now. But I won't say anything hard hitting unless someone asks the right questions.

    That park is pretty cool as is. It still has great potential too. Sometimes I wonder whether the modern trails of Jackson and Spike Jones were so poorly aligned and integrated to discourage access, and uphill bicycle access in particular. These trails are modern and do not comply with agency specifications.

    The recent bracket of dryer than "normal" winters since I stopped doing trail work have been kind to the steep roads and trails. It has been so arid that good trail work conditions have been rare as well.

    I agree that some of the subsequent work on the JDT has been poor. What is in the works is a mystery to me. Priorities are apparently lacking. The trail exists, floating out there like a boat without sails, rudder, and sailors. It's a sad legacy for me, and the park.

    One of the things that irks me still, is the instance of the thick low branch on the Ichabods Oak. It did get cut, and the clearance obtained is less than the DPR requirement. Okay it is fine for bike riding, and for most horse riders. The horse riders may have to stoop on their mounts. The trail bed could still be lowered a bit. However, I think the alternatives were not given fair consideration. It's a small thing, I know, but it is a subset of the communication problems and sclerotic bureaucratic process that did not work.

    There was a threshold which was crossed when Volunteers Outdoors California came to help. Perhaps this was the origin of my demise there. It was a part for sure.

    In short, the weather in the weekdays prior to the event was wet, and the trails supervisor cancelled the event. I thought that it should have gone on. The weekend was dry and the trail work conditions would have been close to ideal. Well, the Supervising Ranger decided to deny rescheduling the event because VOCAL did not have a back up date reserved. I did not like this. Apparently many others wished to reschedule the trail work as well. We networked. There may have been appeals to higher authority whose influence made rescheduling irresistible. Going above, probably did not go well with the Supervising Ranger and the Superintendents. The event happened, and trail work was done. Subsequently the relationship between myself and the senior staff chilled more.

    It had not been as good as it should have been. The Sector Superintendent and his Supervising Ranger were not exactly welcoming when they arrived in the park, after I was an established volunteer. I had drank the IMBA kool-aid some years prior, with a little medicine. In retrospect, not enough medicine, so to speak. Anyway, as I learned more, I became more and more concerned about liability and safety issues. Safety was always on my mind, because I could see that a bad accident is bad enough, but that it could also halt volunteer work. The Superintendent made two requests. One was to become a uniformed volunteer. The other was to form a mountain bike patrol. These items were fulfilled. Then the Superintendent said that I needed to go to the DPR trail school and complete the course. I did that too.

    In the course of that training I learned a lot of good information and put it into practice. At the same time, there were some things I disagreed with in practice. These are in the minority though.

    Let me go back to the beginning. I saw Coe as a place that needed trail maintenance and trail development. I was, in a way, like an idealistic person who decides they want to become a teacher to make the world a better place by starting with the noble ideal of educating children to be good people, but who end up not able to express those ideals due to regulations and policy which guide curriculum. In other words I was probably pretty stupid to expect the State parks agency to agree to allow volunteers to do better trail work than their own paid crews.

    In a profound way, the trail standards are like some of the education standards in the USA: dumbed down. The trail system, as defined in the specifications (note, not as expressed in the actual field), is hyper-conscious towards the safety of visitors. Perhaps the agency really cares about us. But I'd venture to say that we don't want them to care in the way they do. It's hard for me to tell the difference sometimes, whether or not they are really just trying to cover their ass with their signs and pleadings, or just provoke you into doing something they can cite you for. There's a lot of Orwellian doublespeak going on.

    Parse this: Trails should be safe. Well, I'm sorry, no trail can be deemed safe. Alright then, how about trails should be as safe as possible? Well that is even worse.

    Furthermore in this vein, another disappointing aspect of the State Parks style of administration became clear even to me after a while: The concept that trails in State Parks should not become destinations in themselves. The ruling paradigm (dogma) in State Parks is that the trail is merely a means of visiting the reason for the park, and that it should not upstage the scenery, or cultural significance.

    I thought about this stuff for awhile, and I don't recommend it. It is like a snake eating itself.

    Stepping back, and looking at it from afar, I realized that the policy is purposed to deflect attempts at innovation, improvement; stifle local influence; to attempt to impose a bland hypocrisy (while on one hand congratulating themselves on how good a trail looks, they on the other hand praise how it blends into the nature and doesn't impose, and delight in the safety of the 8 foot trail corridor) of trail design (terrain dictates otherwise thank goodness); and confound outsiders.

    This is the nice stuff. I am glad I was stopped. Yes, at the time it was a disappointment. But I had been working under conditions that were not to my liking. I never liked the uniform. I never liked the policing aspect of the Bike Patrol. I just saw the patrol as means towards getting trail work done. Half of it was good, and half was not. I also did not like the merit system the volunteer program and all of the badges etc. I tried to assimilate, but it's not my scene. I'm round, not square.

    That is all I have to say.

  65. #165
    trail rat
    Reputation: slocaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,814
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeBC View Post
    All the latest work on JD from my untrained eye also appears to be the location of the most erosion, fine examples of DPR STANDARDS!
    Their handbook uses 50 year old techniques. And in spite of the fact that the CA State Parks hosts the CA Greenways and Trails Conference where net trail building techniques are shared every year, the old handbook remains, never updated.
    "The physician heals, Nature makes well" - real fortune cookie

    CCCMB trail work for trail access - SLO, CA

  66. #166
    More Torque
    Reputation: Diesel~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorcerer View Post
    Hi,

    Happened to see this thread resurface while I visited this forum this morning to see how the threads on the Bell Built grant were going, and I thought about this quite a bit today. Most days I do not give a thought about Henry W. Coe anymore. I still love the place, and the volunteers though.

    My last photo on this thread shows me out of uniform and with a bandana across my mouth. I covered my mouth, because I did not want to post anything. Put a muzzle on it, to be careful.......

    .....That is all I have to say.
    Appreciate the perspective, and positive attitude, Sorcerer. Your frequent presence in the park is definitely missed.

    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post

    ....To further the discussion about State Park trail standards; the CSP is fine with "Grade Reversals" on trails in their park units; it's the "Rolling Grade Dips" (RGDs) that they take exception to.

    You can argue with them (I have) until you're blue in the face but they will not concede that a RGD is different than a purpose-constructed bike jump. We have to be content with "Drainage Knicks" for getting water off the trail. (Of course these need to be placed twice as often as RGDs and last 1/4 as long!)

    BTW; with enough Grade Reversals, RGDs are not really necessary IMHO.
    PL, your continued work at Coe is much appreciated. Definitely an important, but thankless job.

    I know I'm preaching to the choir, and I don't want to rehash or restate prior commentary, logic, or lack thereof. I do find some irony (imagine that) in the CSP position you mention above. Grade reversals are fine, according to CSP policy, but to add a single true reversal to an existing trail would require moving the bench from its defined alignment, which in turn would require the onerous and nearly impossible to complete PEF process. As a result we're back to square one.

    One of the criticisms that I often hear is that the reason IMBA advocates RGDs is due to the fact that they fun for bikes, even though they are not the best approach to erosion control. We all know that this is a falsehood, and I find it interesting to see the approaches taken by other land stewards in the area, including those not mired in ancient government bureaucracy and dogma. Let's take a look at the approach taken by POST, which is a highly respected conservation and protection agency in they bay area, with a rich history of adding lands to parks and open space areas enjoyed by many types of users. When it comes to trail management, they strive to take the best and most logical approach, independent of the type of user.

    -D

    Jim Donnelly enters rehab...-img_0506r.jpg

  67. #167
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,937
    lol, RGD are bike jumps? They are the worst kind of jump. Nothing like dropping into a hole just before trying to jump. Further proof they are idiots and have no idea what the bike riding experience is like.

    We rode Coe last weekend, and the ruts are getting out of control on some trails. Too bad they don't have a team of volunteers to fix them...

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    459
    I agree with d-bug, rgd are not good for jumps. You can get a foot or two of air off of them but as d-bug points out you drop down into them then come out. I find it somewhat amusing because an rgd actually slows a bike rider down. On top of that if you do by chance boost a rgd this causes a further loss of speed. You want to go fast, keep the tires on the ground.

    The second thing that has never sat well with me with the refusal to build bermed corners. The Supervisors insistence on off camber corners actually makes for an unsafe corner. Riders are way more likely to crash and get hurt going around an off camber corner. Touch the front brake in one of those and your likely to get hurt.

    EDIT:

    Last comment on the JDT. Currently the JDT seems to be producing the kind of trail they are trying to avoid, it is dangerous whether you are fast or slow because of the off camber corners and it is most dangerous for inexperienced riders. This trail is also shaping to be a great trail to go fast on if you are good at that kind of thing. It is flat, wide and with nothing to inhibit speed. Hate to burst their bubble but for a good rider those off camber corners just do not do much to slow us down. But, the off camber corner does take a beating.

    Who are they trying to setup for failure, us, them, the trail, all the above?
    Here's to sweat in your eye.

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    JD is all about being an easy elevator up, my bet is it sees very little downhill bike traffic, I rarely see anyone come down it. Which make it even more ridicules that there were wringing there hands that it might be to fun for bikes going down, I tried it down once before they started destroying it and did not find it anywhere close to the fun I have on the other choices going down in the area, like Spike Jones, Middle Steer or Lyman Wilson.
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    Seems like they are ready to "Finish" the trail saw this staged up at the top of JD on Saturday

    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  71. #171
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459
    Yep it's been setting there for about a week. The intel I'm getting says that they may start today.

    ...not holding my breath as this has been "promised" for a long time now.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  72. #172
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,732
    Good luck.
    I don't rattle.

  73. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,719
    Does not take much luck to turn single track into a mini fireroad
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  74. #174
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,937
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeBC View Post
    Does not take much luck to turn single track into a mini fireroad
    Takes 2-3 years for nature to turn mini fireroad back into singletrack.

  75. #175
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,122
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    Takes 2-3 years for nature to turn mini fireroad back into rutted out mess.
    fify

  76. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ronski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    fify
    Ya, pretty much guaranteed a SWECO won't build quality singletrack. I always hear the claim that it will be fine in a few years. That has not been my experience. You might have a little fake singletrack on an old road after a few years, but it's not the same as sweet singletrack. Go ride Genoa or Susanville and you'll see what I mean. Sure they've gotten a little better. Whatever.

  77. #177
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Now it's next week...



    Oh well...

    Most nobody involved deeply with the JDT wanted to see the job finished with the SWECO but the plans call for a 4' width full bench cut (cuz' the JDT is a Class I multi-use trail per State trail Guidelines) and we're stuck with that.

    They're holding the JDT for ransom in regards to other new trails in the park; until JDT is complete nothing else moves forward. The top 1/2 mile of the JDT where the SWECO will do its thing is just too far out for us to get enough volunteers out there to do the job by hand. About a 5 mile round trip hike and we lose to much time/energy for this to be practical. And it's a long shuttle drive to truck volunteers to the top;something else that's been considered.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  78. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ronski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,063
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post


    Oh well...

    Most nobody involved deeply with the JDT wanted to see the job finished with the SWECO but the plans call for a 4' width full bench cut (cuz' the JDT is a Class I multi-use trail per State trail Guidelines) and we're stuck with that.

    They're holding the JDT for ransom in regards to other new trails in the park; until JDT is complete nothing else moves forward. The top 1/2 mile of the JDT where the SWECO will do its thing is just too far out for us to get enough volunteers out there to do the job by hand. About a 5 mile round trip hike and we lose to much time/energy for this to be practical. And it's a long shuttle drive to truck volunteers to the top;something else that's been considered.
    Well, at 4 feet you should be able to haul ass and get some good strava times. So much for multi-use. There are other tractors besides the dreaded SWECO. Plenty of options in between hand built and SWECO raped.

  79. #179
    Slowest Rider
    Reputation: BigLarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,130
    I've worked on the JDT a couple times myself. Yet, I'm one of those few that feel that short upper section really could use a SWECO for the first cut. It's on a very steep hill that requires a LOT of hard dirt to be moved to make a wide enough trial to not disappear quickly. Volunteer effort is better used elsewhere.

    And I'd like to see that section finished as it's been too long. The rough cut is off camber and almost not ridable. Many instead just cut the switchbacks and hike-a-bikes it now. It'd be nice to finally see that section finished properly to make a ridable switch backed trail.

    The quality of a SWECO trail can vary greatly with the skill of the operator, but I've seen SWECO cuts at Santa Teresa (like Norred and the Fortini rework) turn into nice sustainable singletrack with lots of features, even though I was horrified at first. Likewise I see a nice sustainable singletrack evolving at LongWall Canyon at RCDO.

    Erosion from the steep hills in that section can cause the SWECO cut to turn into singletrack quickly. Maybe then a second pass with volunteers in a couple years will end up doing quite well.

    Note that Grizzly Gulch used to be a fire road, way wider than a SWECO, and is still marked that way on the maps (so it's legal in the rain). Lots of other trails in Henry Coe are former roads as well. Some have reverted all the way beyond singletrack to zerotrack.
    It's not slow, it's doing more MTB time.

  80. #180
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    Finally!

    I'm not sure exactly when but probably today the SWECO finally has worked the very top of the JDT. I wasn't sure if I should start a new thread or post it here or post it to the Trails Conditons thread but it's here for starters.

    My wife and I did a combined horse/bike ride up the JDT to condition the horse (a new horse to us) to bikes and to Coe's single track. Billy (the horse) did quite well with my bike (3rd day working with him) but was bothered by big butterflies (he'll get used to that too); tiger swallowtails were out in force today.

    So the first clue that the DPR crew had made progress came at the section line fence below the upper pond; a rather faint cut could be seen from that location:

    (I was expecting the cut to be much more obvious)

    They worked as far down as VoCal had worked up; this is looking up from that location:

    (there's still some pin flagging below this so maybe they still plan to do more)

    Billy crosses what used to be a rock outcropping that I thought the DPR was going to leave alone as a "pinch-point":


    The SWECO apparently made quick work of what I had fretted about having to deal with by hand:

    (but I would have been shooting for 2' wide not 5' wide!)

    Not only did they remove a "pinch-point" but they straight-lined the approach; more on this later:


    Nearing the top...:


    ...we ran into a familiar face; PRA Treasurer Cynthia L. and a friend (familiar to myself and Jack Burns "Sorcerer" and other Coe regulars):

    May I pet your horse???

    View east from near the top:


    It's beyond me to understand why they felt the need to move the trail over 7' from the pilot bench:





    ...and here also:


    What was a beautiful turn crafted in a natural bowl formed by a natural slump is now something quite different:





    On the other hand; they were quite minimalist in areas; not even a "full bench cut", the operator skilfully used the spoils to support the outside track of the SWECO:


    One can just make out the original trail in the grass to the left; for some reason they stayed tight to the rock:


    End of the "SWECO-ized" trail???


    A slide show of a downhill walk-through is here: The JDT Meets The SWECO 20150325 Slideshow by pliebenberg | Photobucket

    Could have been worse, could have been better; we'll have to wait and see if there's more work yet to come.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  81. #181
    loopy counter
    Reputation: knobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    700
    Thanks for the update Paul.
    Question: Is the old line rideable? New line looks a dusty mess until we get some rain.
    (edit: clearly some of the old line is taken over by the new, so I'm just asking about the few spots like are seen in the photos where they are parallel.)

    Last weekend I saw some new pin flags below the picnic table. At least they were new to me. Don't see any need for sweco there, but makes me wonder.

  82. #182
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by knobs View Post
    Thanks for the update Paul.
    Question: Is the old line rideable? New line looks a dusty mess until we get some rain.
    (edit: clearly some of the old line is taken over by the new, so I'm just asking about the few spots like are seen in the photos where they are parallel.)

    Last weekend I saw some new pin flags below the picnic table. At least they were new to me. Don't see any need for sweco there, but makes me wonder.
    The old line is mostly covered by the new work and would be a chore to get on for the few sections available. Yes it's dusty and rough but I had no trouble riding it; just wasn't real pleasant. The old fall line route is still do-able if you don't mind steep. (Of course they may re-hab that with the SWECO; it was discussed at one point)

    If you mean the pin flags at the first switchback below the picnic table; they're mine and mark the back-slope needing to be cut to bring that corner up to "spec". That will all be hand work.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  83. #183
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,122
    This thread is three years old...

    And they are still mucking with it.

  84. #184
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,937
    They probably changed lines to avoid having any sort of rolling grade dip for drainage.
    These pictures piss me off.

    Good thing this was done at the beginning of dry season. It's obvious they have no ****ing clue on good trail design. I hope to eat those words some day, but doubt I ever will. I will likely forever curse them for ****ing up this section of trail.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SallySalamander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    27
    .....
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Looking for love amongst the Banana Slugs

  86. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,126
    ****ing morons....

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ronski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,063
    Whelp, I told you how much I loved Sweco's. What did you expect.

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    I have no problems with the work, judging by these pictures. The old bench cut may have been fun but it wasn't up to modern standards. After a couple of years, when rain has tamped down the trailbed and grass has grown in to make the trail a foot wide, I suspect most people will be happy with it. There was a time that the lower part was dusty and powdery too, but now it's near-perfect. I wish the park staff would fix or find volunteers to fix other trails in Coe, like the eroded Serpentine Trail for example, although with hand work and not a Sweco. I'm glad they attended to upper JDT.

  89. #189
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,122
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I have no problems with the work, judging by these pictures. The old bench cut may have been fun but it wasn't up to modern standards.
    What standards would that be? Upper trail was perfectly rideable and did not seem prone to erosion like so many other trails at Coe. Three year waste of time from my opinion.

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    I'm no expert, but aren't singletrack trails supposed to be built these days to be a foot wide or maybe 18 inches, gently outsloped, and with grade or dip reversals (I forget the exact term)? If so, there must be some reason for it.

    The former bench cut was, AFAIK, never built to be a trail. It was maybe six inches wide in places, with an outslope that sometimes seemed to be 45 degrees. The Sweco cut is unattractive, but once the trail beds in, it shouldn't look like a Sweco was ever there, I would think.

    I'd defer to whatever IMBA Trail Solutions or Hilride does.

  91. #191
    Slowest Rider
    Reputation: BigLarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,130
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I wish the park staff would fix or find volunteers to fix other trails in Coe, like the eroded Serpentine Trail for example, although with hand work and not a Sweco. I'm glad they attended to upper JDT.
    This is my feeling - if volunteers are available for trail work, there's lots of other places desperately needing love, rather than continuing to further polish what is already the nicest trail at Henry Coe.

    My suggestion for such work is another better entry trail for getting deep into the park such as Lyman Willson. The JDT takes you up most of the way, but not all. There's still more steep hike-a-bike hills up a dirt road to the Willson Peak, and that can be gone around instead. By comparsion, for adventure rides deep into Henry Coe you need to climb a lot less on Lyman-Willson to get to Bowl Trail and then around to Wagon. But there's a few steep parts of the Lyman-Willson road that could really use some switch-backs and singletrack. There wouldn't be a lot of work for those few sections, and of great practical value for any rides going deeper into Henry Coe.
    It's not slow, it's doing more MTB time.

  92. #192
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I'm no expert, but aren't singletrack trails supposed to be built these days to be a foot wide or maybe 18 inches, gently outsloped, and with grade or dip reversals (I forget the exact term)? If so, there must be some reason for it.

    The former bench cut was, AFAIK, never built to be a trail. It was maybe six inches wide in places, with an outslope that sometimes seemed to be 45 degrees. The Sweco cut is unattractive, but once the trail beds in, it shouldn't look like a Sweco was ever there, I would think.

    I'd defer to whatever IMBA Trail Solutions or Hilride does.
    IMBA standards are not permissible in CA Park's Monterey District; this has been covered previously in this thread. "By the book" the JDT is supposed to be built to a 4' wide full-bench cut. This was a compromise between the "realists" who wanted an 18" bench and some distant DPR staffers wanting a 6~8' wide "trail" to meet multi-use requirements.

    The narrow trail seen in these recent photo was the original "pilot bench" (cut by yours truly in this area) which was the "rough draft" of the trail route based on the original grade layout.

    By the official paperwork this 12" pilot bench was to then be widened by hand to a 24" wide interim bench (how most of the JDT was for a while) and then finally widened to the full 4' by the tractor. We were able to finish the lower 3/4 of the JDT by hand to a more reasonable 3~4' bench and the powers that be seem to be OK with this,

    The gripe here is that they chose not to follow the pilot bench with the SWECO; we had "grade reversals" built into this and they're gone. (The SWECO did put in a couple of grade reversals and maybe they're not done yet)

    And BTW the other feature is called a "rolling-grade dip" (RGD) and these are explicitly forbidden as they look too much like "bike jumps".
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  93. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    Thanks, pliebenberg. A most informative summary, and I'm sorry that you had to repeat information you'd posted before. I do recall one or two of those items now, in particular the information that the state parks staff in that sector refuse to use IMBA's trail-width standard.

  94. #194
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459

    In our dreams....

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLarry View Post
    This is my feeling - if volunteers are available for trail work, there's lots of other places desperately needing love, rather than continuing to further polish what is already the nicest trail at Henry Coe.

    My suggestion for such work is another better entry trail for getting deep into the park such as Lyman Willson. The JDT takes you up most of the way, but not all. There's still more steep hike-a-bike hills up a dirt road to the Willson Peak, and that can be gone around instead. By comparsion, for adventure rides deep into Henry Coe you need to climb a lot less on Lyman-Willson to get to Bowl Trail and then around to Wagon. But there's a few steep parts of the Lyman-Willson road that could really use some switch-backs and singletrack. There wouldn't be a lot of work for those few sections, and of great practical value for any rides going deeper into Henry Coe.
    Regarding other trails needing major maintenance we (volunteers) had generated this list with the intent that the SWECO would be used:

    1) Jim Donnelly Trail; its completion is a #1 given.

    2) Spike Jones Trail; just the next ridge over, both the upper and lower portions need work (middle is OK) Lower portion will need extensive brushing before tractor work.

    3) Timm Trail; both ends join SJT, no longer follows the route on the map, Ranger Organo wants it returned to that track. Also a large fallen oak over the trail that would best be handled with a tractor assisting. And off-trail bicycle stunts need obliterating.

    4) Grizzly Gulch Trail; connects directly with SJT, there's a PEF in the system for returning it to a more sustainable grade on the portion below Rock Tower Trail. The portion east of RTT needs drains established and ruts taken care of.

    5) Serpentine Trail; near the upper end of Grizzly Gulch Road, seriously deep ruts to be contended with and appropriate drains established.

    6) Bowl Trail; next geographically, continue the east to west out-sloping begun by Eric G with the SWECO 3 years ago. Also 3 or 4 blown out culverts that need to be eliminated or replaced with the appropriate sizes.

    7) Lyman Willson Ridge Trail; the number of existing drains need to at least be doubled and sized appropriate for the grade. Ruts need to be removed by out-sloping. Possibly re-align trail with the less-steep original ranch road in places.

    This order of this list had more to do with the logistics of the SWECO making a large loop in the southern portion of the Coe; it did not look at trails elsewhere in the Park needing work.

    Alas; we've been told that after the JDT probably nothing else will be committed---something to do with funding the crew that runs the tractor.

    BTW; I heard the reason it's taken so long to get the tractor to the JDT was that there was zero money originally budgeted to the trail---and it is the first multi-use trail to be built in modern times in the Monterey District.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  95. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,041
    I agree with all seven items on the wish list above, except I regret that the stunts were removed from Timm Trail (but maybe the reference to "off-trail bicycle stunts" refers to stunts other than those that were once there?). Incredible that JDT is the first multiuse trail to be built in modern times in the Monterey District. And obviously it was built mainly through the initiative of a lone walker followed by a number of mountain biker trailworkers.

  96. #196
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    I agree with all seven items on the wish list above, except I regret that the stunts were removed from Timm Trail (but maybe the reference to "off-trail bicycle stunts" refers to stunts other than those that were once there?). Incredible that JDT is the first multiuse trail to be built in modern times in the Monterey District. And obviously it was built mainly through the initiative of a lone walker followed by a number of mountain biker trailworkers.
    Yes "other than"...shhhh! (poorly kept secret)
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  97. #197
    Slowest Rider
    Reputation: BigLarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,130
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    Regarding other trails needing major maintenance we (volunteers) had generated this list with the intent that the SWECO would be used: ....
    That's a good list of trails needing some SWECO cleanup. Although Timm and Spike Jones are not that bad and sort of fun as they are. I'd put them at the bottom of the list, even below many other trails deeper in the park.

    However, I was saying if there's hordes of trail workers eager to hand work some singletrack, a better spot for that effort than the top of JDT is to add some switchbacks to the steeper parts of Lyman Willson, to give better access to the deeper parts of Henry Coe. JDT doesn't provide that with all the extra climbing after JDT up steep fire roads to get over the peak.
    It's not slow, it's doing more MTB time.

  98. #198
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLarry View Post
    That's a good list of trails needing some SWECO cleanup. Although Timm and Spike Jones are not that bad and sort of fun as they are. I'd put them at the bottom of the list, even below many other trails deeper in the park.

    However, I was saying if there's hordes of trail workers eager to hand work some singletrack, a better spot for that effort than the top of JDT is to add some switchbacks to the steeper parts of Lyman Willson, to give better access to the deeper parts of Henry Coe. JDT doesn't provide that with all the extra climbing after JDT up steep fire roads to get over the peak.
    The order of that list had to do with the logistics of moving the SWECO around; not the importance of the trails being worked on. FWIW Lyman Willson was on the top of the list when it came to importance; at least in the opinion of the uniformed volunteers creating the list. I suspect the Department's answer to the "better access to the deeper parts" would be "take Coit Road".

    Besides, somebody here on MTBR made the comment to the effect of "if you can't handle the walls; don't go deep". Some truth to that.

    BTW; the Dowdy Visitor Center will open for the season on Saturday, May 2.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  99. #199
    loopy counter
    Reputation: knobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLarry View Post
    My suggestion for such work is another better entry trail for getting deep into the park such as Lyman Willson. The JDT takes you up most of the way, but not all. There's still more steep hike-a-bike hills up a dirt road to the Willson Peak, and that can be gone around instead.
    I think you are talking about the section from Spike Jones to the ridge top of Wilson Peak. There is a legacy route that continues past Spike Jones spring, but it is very overgrown. I scouted this a few years ago, it would be no easy task to restore that trail. And ultimately as a trail user you still have to climb.


    Quote Originally Posted by BigLarry View Post
    By comparsion, for adventure rides deep into Henry Coe you need to climb a lot less on Lyman-Willson to get to Bowl Trail and then around to Wagon. But there's a few steep parts of the Lyman-Willson road that could really use some switch-backs and singletrack. There wouldn't be a lot of work for those few sections, and of great practical value for any rides going deeper into Henry Coe.
    JackBurns once built a pilot trail to lessen the grade of one of those "few steep parts" but it lasted about a season and quickly grassed over. It would seem that the majority of trail users prefer a wall here.

  100. #200
    Slowest Rider
    Reputation: BigLarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,130
    Quote Originally Posted by pliebenberg View Post
    The order of that list had to do with the logistics of moving the SWECO around; not the importance of the trails being worked on. FWIW Lyman Willson was on the top of the list when it came to importance; at least in the opinion of the uniformed volunteers creating the list. I suspect the Department's answer to the "better access to the deeper parts" would be "take Coit Road".

    Besides, somebody here on MTBR made the comment to the effect of "if you can't handle the walls; don't go deep". Some truth to that.

    BTW; the Dowdy Visitor Center will open for the season on Saturday, May 2.
    I climb up Coit Rd. and Lyman-Willson several times a year, as well as JDT and other trails. These initial climbs are certainly the ticket price for entry into deeper Henry Coe, no matter which path.

    However, by comment you quoted, all trails out of Hunting Hollow, including JDT, should go straight up the hills. Yet somehow people seem to greatly enjoy and flock to the excellently built switchbacked JDT, in spite of the upper end point not really connecting well to the other trails in the park. So why not build really nice trails like JDT that are also useful?

    Glad to hear Lyman-Willson is on top of the list for trail work. Is that to simply maintain or improve with more singletrack sections?

    To be clear, I mentioned Lyman-Willson as just one example of where precious volunteer hand trail worker effort could be of greater value than the top of JDT, which is better off being done by a SWECO due to the amount of dirt to move. I'm sure you have a nice big list of many more useful places for trail work. I just mentioned one that comes to mind.

    Nice to hear Dowdy entrance is opening for the summer. I've never started from Dowdy before, and will try that in May.

    As far as my own riding, I've often gone deep into Henry Coe, as far as Mississippi Lake and back from Hunting Hollow. Being down 50 lbs as well as much stronger (from >1hour/day riding) will let me go further on my new 10 lb lighter Bronson. Other med/breathing issues from last year have cleared up too. By the end of summer I'll be down ~90 lbs and need to change my user name.
    Last edited by BigLarry; 03-29-2015 at 11:03 AM.
    It's not slow, it's doing more MTB time.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

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