Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 86
  1. #1
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725

    Big Bear...Out of bounds trails closed

    the forestry dept came in and did a complete closeure top to bottom of all your favorite trail...so good with a few rain storms you may never know they exsisted...never seen anybody do the job they did....anyway just a heads up so you don't go looking and have to pedal back.
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    33
    Man.. That's a shame.

  3. #3
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Are we talking...all? Like roughly 5 or 6 depending how you count them?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    783
    Are they posted closed or did they somehow cover them up?

  5. #5
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    Quote Originally Posted by jlmuncie View Post
    Are they posted closed or did they somehow cover them up?
    ..we are talking all....and no signs....so you pedal over to them and then will have to pedal back .....and I do mean top to bottom complete
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  6. #6
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Hmmm, not really worth going up there anymore then. That's too bad.


    Your tax dollars at work!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    98
    apparently not all: plantation, wet dream aka forest dream, trick or treat are still legal.

  8. #8
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Sounds like some really worthwhile work they are doing up there. I wonder when the Walmart will go in?

  9. #9
    Gor'n Ridin'!
    Reputation: Hawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,064
    Please provide a link. I cannot find any mention of this online. Thanks!

  10. #10
    dft
    dft is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,117
    i also directly heard it from a good friend that went.
    weak, that was a big part of the place. the place drops many notches in my book. mammoth back to 10x greater than big bear again

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    17
    I was thinking about going tomorrow and haven't ridin summit yet is it worth it now or not

  12. #12
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Shrive81 View Post
    I was thinking about going tomorrow and haven't ridin summit yet is it worth it now or not
    Well 95% of the people riding up there probably never touched the out of bounds trails. It's definitely worth going at least once to ride the legal trails. They are pretty fun.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    17
    Well it will be my first time anyone want to roll with me or meet me up there

  14. #14
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,127
    Back in the day I rode many of the out of bounds trails, but since Summit start building trails I spent my day on Westridge. While I do not like that they closed them, I don't think it is going to ruin the down hill experience up there.

    Now, you said they are closed from top to bottom, but there are no signs.... so how are they closed?
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    They did extensive naturizing of the trails, so much that you wouldn't even know they were there if you did not have previous knowledge...closed by virtue of no longer existing. If the USFS put a fraction of the effort they must have spent doing this into maintaining trails and following better fire prevention methods, we would be a TON better off. Seems like they need our tax dollars AND money from questionably legal forest adventure passes to subsidize all the policing they have to do to make sure everyone has forest adventure passes...and of course to protect everyone from the scourge of us!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    That said, still totally worth it for the 3 on property trails we have now....maybe not for someone of Gemini's level unless he wants a mellow day! This plus the ridiculous 10 mile a yr limit the USFS slapped on Summit really sucks...Summit is still doing a really good job with their hands tied a bit.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,936
    They did in fact close most of the illegal trails. The trails that were closed were poorly made and caused tons of erosion. I'm not so against illegal trails, that's how alot of the trails up here were made, I'm just against poorly made and designed trails. Anything that goes straight down the fall line is poorly designed, that's one reason they were shut down.

  18. #18
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Yeah, I'm not sure there's much they can do to "close" some of the those trails. As you said they just went straight down the hill. Unless they added lots of unrideable obstacles or something. Those can always be moved or cut away though....

  19. #19
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini2k05 View Post
    Yeah, I'm not sure there's much they can do to "close" some of the those trails. As you said they just went straight down the hill. Unless they added lots of unrideable obstacles or something. Those can always be moved or cut away though....
    honestly....it would take 10 guys a full week to clean out one trail to ride.....but then you would need something to to move 30 to 50 foot trees that are 3 feet wide....they chopped trees down to block trails....honestly these trails are done...they did the most thorough job I have ever seen
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  20. #20
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,127
    Quote Originally Posted by SHIVER ME TIMBERS View Post
    honestly....it would take 10 guys a full week to clean out one trail to ride.....but then you would need something to to move 30 to 50 foot trees that are 3 feet wide....they chopped trees down to block trails....honestly these trails are done...they did the most thorough job I have ever seen
    Cutting down trees to save the forest eh?


    Seems legit.........



    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Cutting down trees to save the forest eh?


    Seems legit.........



    Beautiful irony, isn't it?

    Yeah, these trails ain't coming back. I have never seen such thorough decommissioning...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,426

    Big Bear...Out of bounds trails closed

    Forests are thinned on a large scale in the name of forest health all the time. Part of the issue with the Rim fire is that some areas are overgrown because of a 100 year old policy that every fire be extinguished as quickly as possible.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    888
    Gosh this pisses me off, I was looking forward to riding these new trails this month when it cools down some.

    This is why so many trails in the san bernadino mtns are all local built secret trails, because big brother always comes in and shuts them down.

    I live in lake arrowhead and what the forestry wants us to do with our property is ridiculous. We have to clear out trees less than 5 inches in diameter if they are within 8 ft of another tree. They claim this will help prevent forest fires and will leave more water for the older growth trees. This is all complete bull and I'll tell you why.

    1. The more the sun hits the ground, the more weeds can grow because weeds need a lot of sun to grow and multiply. What does this do? It creates a worse off fire condition because the weeds die and dry up making it easier to catch fire.

    Another thing is that the more the sun can heat the ground, the faster the ground dries up, so by cutting down all the small trees, you're not benefiting the larger ones because the younger trees help shade the ground even further. Keeping it more moist into the late spring.

    2. When you cut the younger growth, you are destroying the future of the forest, no younger trees, no trees that will take the place of older growth when those trees die.

    3. Every dam fire is started on the southern facing slopes, the sunny side where all the low growing brush and weeds grow. The fire will build intensity and if the fire can burn down 100ft plus trees filled with water and sap, those little trees won't mean crap.

    4. Oh, and this was all subsidized by your tax dollars.

    I never did it, I would have had to cut out around 20 trees. When the guy showed up on my property to survey, I told him to get the F off my property and to take me to court. He never came back.

    The government is nothing more than a bunch of idiots exercising their power, nothing more.
    08 Enduro: '12 Van RC2, Push DHX 5 coil, Flow EX, Hope m4, 750mm bar, Blacklite Post.

    Website
    http://all-mtn.com/

  24. #24
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    Quote Originally Posted by scvkurt03 View Post
    Forests are thinned on a large scale in the name of forest health all the time. Part of the issue with the Rim fire is that some areas are overgrown because of a 100 year old policy that every fire be extinguished as quickly as possible.
    in the 1840 book by Richard Henry Dana (Dana Point) "Two Years Before the Mast" ....One thing I found interesting was Richard saying California was always on fire when he took the ship up and down the coast....lightening strikes and what not but always burning...
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  25. #25
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    Quote Originally Posted by sirsam84 View Post

    Yeah, these trails ain't coming back. I have never seen such thorough decommissioning...
    tru dat
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,936
    What some don't understand is, the forestry closing those trails, was an agreement that new, more sustainable trails are to be built. Most of the trails in question that are being closed is not a " big brother" or the government " sticking in to the man" it's because those trails were so poorly made/ designed. If your going to go out and built a trail, make it with some common sense involved, don't know how many of you have ridden those trails in question, but they were stupidly designed and causing tons of erosion because most of the trails went straight down the fall line. New trails are coming, most aren't being made to accommodate guys/ girls on big travel bikes( except on Snow Summit), but they are being more properly built....remember this word when it comes to trail building..."substantibility"
    I'm for more trails, just the trails have to be done right.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    888
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane Jeff View Post
    What some don't understand is, the forestry closing those trails, was an agreement that new, more sustainable trails are to be built. Most of the trails in question that are being closed is not a " big brother" or the government " sticking in to the man" it's because those trails were so poorly made/ designed. If your going to go out and built a trail, make it with some common sense involved, don't know how many of you have ridden those trails in question, but they were stupidly designed and causing tons of erosion because most of the trails went straight down the fall line. New trails are coming, most aren't being made to accommodate guys/ girls on big travel bikes( except on Snow Summit), but they are being more properly built....remember this word when it comes to trail building..."substantibility"
    I'm for more trails, just the trails have to be done right.
    Your lac of inelegance is entertaining, at least I know I'm not drinking the coo laid.

    First thing is first, why did the forestry close the Rim Nordic Super D and DH races this season??? Because they "built" the trail wrong; I raced both trails two times last year and there wasn't a dam thing wrong with the trail. So this is a second show up of the forestry flexing their muscles.

    Erosion??? I live up here, I know you don't just by reading that comment. You should see the natural erosion that occurs from summer thunderstorms when we get flash flooding, the water creates little rivers all over the mountain. I would know because I have several behind my cabin that occur when this happens and it pushes dirt and makes the canal bigger.

    So you're saying they couldn't create water canals down the trail so that the water could flow without erosion??? Like what trail builders do to direct water off the trial? And by cutting the trees down to block the trail solves the problem, why not dig up the trial and redesign it?? Because they don't want it there at all. They could have, its just that the forestry dept. doesn't want any further development of trails on THEIR LAND, if you haven't realized its not ours, it's the governments. One more thing, what do you think the water does when the trail isn't there??? lol, stupid people.

    I do agree we need some order so that there aren't a thousand different trails all over the place, but think about it this way. Do you really believe any of us would build so many trails until you can't ride a single one without crossing over other trails?

    I do landscaping and I know the environment up here better than anyone else, and if you actually read what I've posted in my other statement, you'd realize that it's not about the environment anymore, it's about control over what we can do. Because the "elite" somehow believe they know everything and we have to conform to their ways.
    08 Enduro: '12 Van RC2, Push DHX 5 coil, Flow EX, Hope m4, 750mm bar, Blacklite Post.

    Website
    http://all-mtn.com/

  28. #28
    R.I.P. DogFriend
    Reputation: jeffj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,484
    For the record, I believe Hurricane Jeff lives in Big Bear.
    ============================
    Some of the closures seem to not be consistent with the supposed reasons. If I understand which trails have been closed, and which remain. I'm not advocating that they should close other trails because they are even less sustainable than those which were closed.

    As an example, how is the lower section of Castle Rock more sustainable and better built than the section of Cabin 89 that was closed?

    With so many riding SS these days, just the greatly reduced traffic would have gone a long ways toward those trails requiring much less maintenance.

    Also, I'm not particularly a fan of being herded into a relative bull ring where trails resemble the on-ramp to the 405 on a busy day. If you were a dirt biker in the 70's, you remember what happened to dirt bikes back then. Not that something shouldn't have been done, but that was quite drastic IMHO. The powers that were made it so that dirt bikes were restricted to small areas, and everybody is all up in everyone else's business. Many of us go to the forest to get away from from crowds, not to hang with them in a different environment.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: evdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,190
    Quote Originally Posted by camarosam View Post
    I live in lake arrowhead and what the forestry wants us to do with our property is ridiculous. We have to clear out trees less than 5 inches in diameter if they are within 8 ft of another tree. They claim this will help prevent forest fires and will leave more water for the older growth trees. This is all complete bull and I'll tell you why.

    1. The more the sun hits the ground, the more weeds can grow because weeds need a lot of sun to grow and multiply. What does this do? It creates a worse off fire condition because the weeds die and dry up making it easier to catch fire.

    Another thing is that the more the sun can heat the ground, the faster the ground dries up, so by cutting down all the small trees, you're not benefiting the larger ones because the younger trees help shade the ground even further. Keeping it more moist into the late spring.

    2. When you cut the younger growth, you are destroying the future of the forest, no younger trees, no trees that will take the place of older growth when those trees die.

    3. Every dam fire is started on the southern facing slopes, the sunny side where all the low growing brush and weeds grow. The fire will build intensity and if the fire can burn down 100ft plus trees filled with water and sap, those little trees won't mean crap.

    4. Oh, and this was all subsidized by your tax dollars.

    I never did it, I would have had to cut out around 20 trees. When the guy showed up on my property to survey, I told him to get the F off my property and to take me to court. He never came back.

    The government is nothing more than a bunch of idiots exercising their power, nothing more.
    ^^ That is some funny sh*t...

    Lets hope you never have to learn first hand why they are called suicide subdivisions.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    If "properly built" is exemplified by Skyline Trail, then we have an issue. While I am grateful that trail was built (generously given to us by the USFS essentially allowing trail to be built on the shoulder of the fireroad), it almost seems like the potential fun element, even given restrictions aforementioned, was deliberately suppressed. I'm not talking about big bike vs little bike issues here...ex

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    If "properly built" is exemplified by Skyline Trail, then we have an issue. While I am grateful that trail was built (generously given to us by the USFS essentially allowing trail to be built on the shoulder of the fireroad), it almost seems like the potential fun element, even given restrictions aforementioned, was deliberately suppressed. I'm not talking about big bike vs little bike issues here...exploration trail and SART are examples of xc trails that are far more enjoyable because they seem to maximize flow and fun rather than the skyline approach.

  32. #32
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    I can understand hurricane jeff's post but closing the other trails so they can open up others at SS is untrue... when the Summit trail was made the forestry dept said it was too wide and penalized SS. saying essentially you made 2 trails. now instead of some new trails being built to ease traffic flow. They have SS in a new trail making hold(slowing down the making of new trails). This sucks....and furthermore one only has to look at NorthStar....they have trails like the out of bounds trails of SS....they have many trails steep and loose there at NStar. And lake Tahoe has more stringent laws then Big Bear.

    Honestly, Snow Summit is fvcked by the forrestry dept. SS has seen the traffic this year. Many people want to go there because it is close. SS has a huge population of bikers in it's radius pull, plus a lot of sunshine. They could easily build some A line type trails, some steep trails with pavers(sustanable). they could make the place something special but the forrestry dept is holding there hands behind their back. It gets pretty boring riding 3 trails. That is why I liked the other stuff and it is gone.

    Lift lines and only 3 trails is tough to make money. ....it is sad
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  33. #33
    Gor'n Ridin'!
    Reputation: Hawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,064
    Not to rain on anyone's parade but SS is a SKIING resort that just so happens to offer a little bit of cycling. I rode the lifts with family again this Summer as we always do for entertainment when we are up there. It's not my kind of riding place but it was slammed with cyclists.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,936
    camarosam, I do live in Big Bear, while closing the super d and DH courses at Rim Nordic, in my opinion, pretty stupid of the forestry, but maybe they were made without permission, which I can somewhat understand...but they again, since you "know the environment better than anyone else" maybe there are other reasons, ie space aliens, zombies, etc.
    What I gather from your argument is, that there is not a proper way to built trails, just built and they will sustain themselves I guess, right? Have you ridden those trails in question?
    I'm not totally a fan of the Forestry or of any trail being closed and I believe that we shouldn't be restricted with so much limitations sometimes, but your skepticism of the government is frightening....

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawg View Post
    Not to rain on anyone's parade but SS is a SKIING resort that just so happens to offer a little bit of cycling. I rode the lifts with family again this Summer as we always do for entertainment when we are up there. It's not my kind of riding place but it was slammed with cyclists.
    Whistler was also, but their biggest days are now summer with bikes and not winter. There is a definite shift for some of these resorts and SS has a huge opportunity because of the population base nearby.

  36. #36
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawg View Post
    Not to rain on anyone's parade but SS is a SKIING resort that just so happens to offer a little bit of cycling. I rode the lifts with family again this Summer as we always do for entertainment when we are up there. It's not my kind of riding place but it was slammed with cyclists.
    This is the most worthless comment I've ever seen on mtbr.

  37. #37
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    Whistler was also, but their biggest days are now summer with bikes and not winter. There is a definite shift for some of these resorts and SS has a huge opportunity because of the population base nearby.
    something to think about Whistler made more money last year on mtn biking then it did on skiiing...maybe this year too...think about that more profit on mtn biking. SS has a longer biking season and greater population pool
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  38. #38
    BM and PQ Trail Rep
    Reputation: bankerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,522
    I saw it stated earlier that the was a limit to the number of miles that's Snow Summit can put on its mountain per year. To even try to compare them to an establishment like Whistler, Mammoth, or North Star in SS's first year of operation is a bit absurd. Maybe now that they have seen the crowds, and realize they will be putting in more trails next year, SS will open more left service to accommodate everybody.
    Hopefully some of those trails will be a small compensation for the ones closed?
    Apathy will get you exactly what you deserve

  39. #39
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Quote Originally Posted by bankerboy View Post
    I saw it stated earlier that the was a limit to the number of miles that's Snow Summit can put on its mountain per year. To even try to compare them to an establishment like Whistler, Mammoth, or North Star in SS's first year of operation is a bit absurd. Maybe now that they have seen the crowds, and realize they will be putting in more trails next year, SS will open more left service to accommodate everybody.
    Hopefully some of those trails will be a small compensation for the ones closed?
    Opening the non-wilderness sections of the PCT to bikes would a small compensation....

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    Also, the argument of unsustainable erosion prone trails is suspect. They closed Ho Chi Minh, upper Dickies, Sinners, not to mention all the other more xc ST on the west side, NONE of which seemed even remotely more erosion prone than any of the "legal" trails. At the same time, they kept the fall line crap sandpit known as old national open????? They also neutered that fun rock tech section of lower fall line and took out the little jumps built over fallen logs (which they never bothered to clean up in the first place)!

    The USFs can do whatever it pleases, but they should be honest about the reasons!

  41. #41
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by sirsam84 View Post
    The USFs can do whatever it pleases, but they should be honest about the reasons!
    Yeah, it has nothing to do with "erosion". Erosion is to the USFS like terrorism and national security is to the rest of the federal government. I've been riding those trails for the better part of a decade now. They are no more eroded or blown out then when I started riding them, and I REALLY doubt they get much if any maintenance. It's about control, exerting control to feel important and powerful.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    714
    Sucks. Was hoping to go up next weekend before it got all closed down.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,936
    I guess none of you guys who posted attended any of the "town hall meetings" from either the USFS, BB Trails foundation or the City of BBL masterplan (in regards to trail building, maintenance and trail closures). Maybe I dont sound like it, but I dont want any trail closures, I'm not a fanboy of the USFS in regards to their forestry rules, Im not paranoid of the Government either. The point Im making is, they are closing some of the illegal trails and will be building more legal, sustainable trails in the future, its a give and take situation. I agree, some of the trails they closed or planning on closing, make no sense at all, some of the trails they did close however, I can understand.

    There are always going to be people complaining about anything that may affect them, some dont see the big picture. If the USFS just let illegal trail building, by either cyclist, motorcycles, jeeps, equestrians. etc, the forest would be a mess, like it or not, there has to be rules, be it on guns, alcohol, automobiles, trail building,etc, or we would just have mayhem.

    Done.......

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by camarosam View Post
    Gosh this pisses me off, I was looking forward to riding these new trails this month when it cools down some.

    This is why so many trails in the san bernadino mtns are all local built secret trails, because big brother always comes in and shuts them down.

    I live in lake arrowhead and what the forestry wants us to do with our property is ridiculous. We have to clear out trees less than 5 inches in diameter if they are within 8 ft of another tree. They claim this will help prevent forest fires and will leave more water for the older growth trees. This is all complete bull and I'll tell you why.

    1. The more the sun hits the ground, the more weeds can grow because weeds need a lot of sun to grow and multiply. What does this do? It creates a worse off fire condition because the weeds die and dry up making it easier to catch fire.

    Another thing is that the more the sun can heat the ground, the faster the ground dries up, so by cutting down all the small trees, you're not benefiting the larger ones because the younger trees help shade the ground even further. Keeping it more moist into the late spring.

    2. When you cut the younger growth, you are destroying the future of the forest, no younger trees, no trees that will take the place of older growth when those trees die.

    3. Every dam fire is started on the southern facing slopes, the sunny side where all the low growing brush and weeds grow. The fire will build intensity and if the fire can burn down 100ft plus trees filled with water and sap, those little trees won't mean crap.

    4. Oh, and this was all subsidized by your tax dollars.

    I never did it, I would have had to cut out around 20 trees. When the guy showed up on my property to survey, I told him to get the F off my property and to take me to court. He never came back.

    The government is nothing more than a bunch of idiots exercising their power, nothing more.
    You really don't know what you are talking about. That was the nicest way I could put it.

  45. #45
    Yes, that's fonetic
    Reputation: whoda*huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,886
    Quote Originally Posted by SHIVER ME TIMBERS View Post
    ....They could easily build some A line type trails,....
    They could build a much shorter version, but the fact that Whistler gets WAY more rain in the summer than Big Bear on average (Whistler British Columbia Canada Climate Graphs, with Monthly Temperatures, Precipitation, & Snowfall in Whistler, California Data Exchange Center) means that the problems Whistler has keeping A-Line in ridable shape (especially this summer with the lack of rain) would be exponentially worse at Snow Summit. But...I guess they have that problem with all their trails.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    289
    Disgusting.

  47. #47
    Professional Troll
    Reputation: Gemini2k05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by whodaphuck View Post
    would be exponentially worse at Snow Summit. But...I guess they have that problem with all their trails.
    All wood takeoffs, pavered berms. Problem solved

  48. #48
    Yes, that's fonetic
    Reputation: whoda*huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,886
    Makes sense. Actually haven't ridden bb for years and was going on my memory of the dust pit it was looong ago.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini2k05 View Post
    Yeah, it has nothing to do with "erosion". Erosion is to the USFS like terrorism and national security is to the rest of the federal government. I've been riding those trails for the better part of a decade now. They are no more eroded or blown out then when I started riding them, and I REALLY doubt they get much if any maintenance. It's about control, exerting control to feel important and powerful.
    Control and being in the pocket of Sierra club and other anti biking group lobbyists!

    Love the terrorism analogy! Spend trillions on something that kills fewer people than deer or lightning annually!

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    602
    That illegal trail argument is ridiculous. They were system trails merely because the USFS screwed over Pat Follett when he tried to take the legal approach to get them included. Another smoke screen. This is not some Tea Party anti government ranting (trust me, I think they are more dangerous to this country than Al Qaeda).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. When the trails are closed, I am lost...
    By Dion in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 06:18 PM
  2. Trails That Should Be Closed
    By driftwood in forum North & South Carolina
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 01:17 PM
  3. Fort Ord trails closed?
    By HRP in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-01-2012, 06:56 PM
  4. Closed Trails
    By five5 in forum Minnesota, Wisconsin
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-21-2012, 07:29 AM
  5. MTRP and the "out of bounds" trails
    By CEB in forum California - Socal
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-20-2011, 01:51 PM

Posting Permissions

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