yeah, it was my favorite local spot. i can't afford the fine, so... do you happen to know if you friend is a member of dirttreaders.com here in sd? i've heard mixed stories about riders going back counterbalanced by fines.
Originally Posted by dirtvert
anyway, last trip to noble was also in the snow. my buddies gf slid out on a turn and broke her leg. yeah, i've got to get back there too.- ok, that sounded wrong. i meant it was at least a year since i've been there.
Last edited by jSatch; 02-20-2013 at 02:28 PM.
I'm glad you brought up speeding, because it is the perfect analogy. Having the limit at 55 is by all measures a good thing-- less gas, less accidents, less fatalities, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody followed that limit, so they moved it back up to a more reasonable 65-70mph.
When you say:
...you are putting riding a mtb on singletrack at the same level as speeding, and by speeding I take it you mean 80+, not the 65-75mph you, me, and most other drivers in California do when we're not locked in traffic jams. I don't think many people out there driving 70mph in a 65 think they are criminals, and thanks to everyone doing it, there is not really enforcement until you are going 10+ over the limit. I feel like this is the perfect analogy for mtb, since everyone IS doing it, and as a result the posted "limits" have become more like minimum speeds for the slow lane on the freeways.
Originally Posted by dirtvert
To complete the analogy, we need to show that mtb'ing is like doing 70 in a 65--currently illegal but not significantly more dangerous. I'm not asking for the speed limit to be increased to 85... that would be like riding down the Yosemite Falls trail on a Sunday in June and posting it on Strava.
When we do make our presentations and attend meetings (and I have), we can't come across as lone thrill seekers motivated by our individual desire to ride the single piece of trail in question, and to do so, some kind of quantitative data is required.
I understand what you are saying about trails being sanitized for speed, but unfortunately in my area (norcal) the vast majority of sanitizing is done by the park authorities in little bulldozers, so the occasional cut switchback doesn't worry me too much.
THE BAY AREA... WHERE IF IT'S FUN, IT'S ILLEGAL
Yeah...that sounds good in theory, but I just can't see it playing out in our favor. And I'm not willing to gamble with some of my/our favorite trails. We're gonna to have to agree to disagree on this one.
And please don't post any more info about my favorite poach (Yosemite Falls).
Last edited by dirtvert; 02-20-2013 at 01:58 PM.
Because we like the taste of freedom; because we like the smell of danger. ~ E. Abbey
it really depends on the committees you need to appease and what their take is.
as with the speeding, well only a little bit so it's socially justifiable, in a court of law you were still speeding and therefore guilty. doesn't matter what anyone else was doing. for trails it all depends on how favorable or unfavorable the committee finds your request. sure, they could go along with the, 'yeah, we need more trails' approach, but in my experience that is a little on the optimistic side of reality. it's like the judge saying, 'oh, so everyone else was going that fast too? ok, you're excused with no fine. now let me reprimand the arresting officer for singling you out and causing you to have such a bad day.' more likely, as i mentioned before, especially if you have some committee members opposed to the idea, they will say 'so, you are saying all these people are breaking the law and we should accommodate the requests of these people who have no respect for the law?' the latter argument i've heard many times. all it takes is 1 member of the anti-bike brigade on the committee (and you will likely find many), and your illegal activity argument blows up in your face. and once it does blow up in your face you you are done. and if there are enviro issues or endangered plants or animals (fairy shrimp?) you will wish you could transport yourself to any other part of the world for that moment. so unless they all saw a need for trails before you walked in the door (hikers, bikers, joggers), you cannot condone illegal activity to a community committee and expect them to look at it favorably.
Last edited by jSatch; 02-20-2013 at 03:20 PM.
I've ridden the Yosemite falls trail, mediocre at best, the Pohono Trail is much better.
Where is the adventure in having your ride spoon fed to you by a gadget? What's wrong with feeling lost?
Regarding the part of this discussion about gaining access to existing, official trails, is it official trails that have been closed to bikes in the past 10 years that you're trying to regain access to, or are we talking about gaining access to trails that were closed in the 80's or early 90's (possibly with no due process) when mt. biking became popular?
In the greater Sacramento/foothills region, I believe we're talking about the latter as I can't think of any official trail that used to be bike-legal being closed to bikes around here, but I've only been here 13 years. While GPS tracking websites do make me nervous about how State Parks could interpret/use the info, I'm in the camp that thinks the gps data could ultimately be a benefit in gaining access to trails that bikes were booted off when mt. biking was new, if properly studied.
There are some short, connector trails around here that aren't bike legal which Strava shows have been ridden well over 1,000 times in the past 2 years (which doesn't include all those that aren't using Strava). Now if State Parks can take a look at actual use, cross check with how many incidents of accidents or complaints that have come from this trail or that trail, and surmise that there really isn't a problem with bikes on this or that section, perhaps re-designating it/them as multi-use under the forthcoming PIER deal will be relatively easy. I could be wrong, but the scenario is possible in my mind.
If Strava disappeared tomorrow, another company would replace it. People leaving easily accessible digital tracks of their riding is not going to go away. Ever. Rather than bemoan the idjits that can't help but post this stuff, figure out a way to use it to your advantage? As for the idjits that expose your secret stash, you have every right to do what you can to get them to delete/hide their tracks... it just takes a little work.
Empty, when can we expect you to run for Office of some sorts relating to this topic? I'll stuff the ballot box from way down here in Son Cty.
Btw, when's the next FLEA?
Wait,who did he tell you that?....
I think folks are referring to two pretty different varieties of riding of "unsanctioned" trails here.
1) Secret trails. From the 1st page of thread: "This is a mountain bike only trail built by a mountain biker and was being kept low key. Then some jack hole made a segment." Not clear what type of land this was on; might have been private property for all anyone knows. I don't really have an opinion on putting this type of thing on strava. Don't really know the details.
2) Riding trails on public lands that are VERY out in the open and are heavily used by the general public, including cyclists, regardless of the fact that cycling may not technically be allowed. Trails on state park land, state Universities, etc would fall into this category. There is nothing secret about this sort of trail. You see EVERYBODY out there (families with kids, etc). When you have trails that have been ridden literally 10000's+ of times by 1000's+ of riders, it is not really spilling the beans for somebody to make strava segments. It is just documenting the reality.
I think the vast majority of riding on "non-sanctioned" trails probably falls under category 2.
The specific trail in question should not have been segmented for any reason, much less ridden by anyone who doesn't know about it. It certainly isn't obvious, and would only be found either by word of mouth or poking around, at least without it being on Strava.
2011 Giant Glory 01
2013 Pivot Firebird
2004 Turner Rail - Stoled
Damn it! What browser are you using?
Originally Posted by dirtvert
I'm not sure how this works.
Well, in any case, the request from the OP in Post #1 is not going to happen (through no fault of my own, I'm able to find enough good riding without the need to ride illegal trails and have rebelled enough in my late teens and twenties and don't want to risk pricey fines); you can't control people, and it's too late anyway. A thread on mtbr is not likely to change much, but it is shown there are many different opinions. Yawn...
Discovering new trails without the aid of data sharing is part of the fun of mountain biking. The uncertainty of something new should be what attracts people, not the predictability of what other people have done.
I enjoy riding new trails regardless of how I discovered them. I also enjoy sharing the trails I've discovered with others, whether the method used is internet or in person. Personally, I love exploring the unknown with that "uncertainty" you speak of, but that's not even remotely the only fun part of mountain biking & certainly not for everyone.
Originally Posted by aspiringmechanic