Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rky_mtn_srfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    38

    man made structures

    I absolutely believe there is a use for highly technical man made structures that do require pads in our forests, but I also prefer natural features. Everything has it's place.

    And, screw the multi-use nonsense it's a lie and mtn biking is always discriminated against. I want full-on mtn biking trails that may or may not be 1-way trails, and I don't want to share those types of trails with horses or hikers-they already have enough of their own single use areas on public land.

    Is it possible to reasonably discuss this subject, or will I just need to delete this post??

  2. #2
    skillz to pay billz
    Reputation: nOOby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,556
    just don't call little raven a freeride trail

  3. #3
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,446
    some folks will discuss it civily, but you will probably get some aggro responses.
    A major issue is what land does this get built on. The forest service isn't at all interested in it, unless it's approved, and those structures will be like the ones you see in that little raven thread. They will not be stunts, or anything that might create a liability issue. It's just not going to happen on public land around here.
    ****

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rky_mtn_srfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    38
    so far so good. Little Raven is many things, but definitely not a freeride trail. Side note, "Freeride trail" is a bit of an oxymoron to me, but I'm different, and do like to freeride.

    So good point on the liability. Keystone manages it well, and WP is trying. They both lease their land from the USFS, so me thinks the liability obstacle is just that, not a road or trail block.

    But what I'm really wanting is a dedicated mtn biking area. Take Rampart Range for example. Motoheads united and established a sweet area that's motsly dedicated to moto's. That is what I want for mtn biking in Bldr CO.

  5. #5
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,446
    Both your examples have a commonality. Keystone is motivated to jump through the hoops set up by the forest service, for an economical reward; your lift ticket purchase.
    Rampart gets time put into it by various moto advocacy groups. BTW, Rampart rocks.
    Since Rampart doesn't have made made stunts, they can avoid the liabilty issue. Keystone is taking the chance that you won't sue them if you get injured, and they have some money to fight that if you did.
    ****

  6. #6
    skillz to pay billz
    Reputation: nOOby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,556
    Quote Originally Posted by rky_mtn_srfr
    So good point on the liability. Keystone manages it well, and WP is trying. They both lease their land from the USFS, so me thinks the liability obstacle is just that, not a road or trail block.
    obviously covered by the ski area's umbrella insurance coverage, I would think.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jaysun71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by rky_mtn_srfr
    But what I'm really wanting is a dedicated mtn biking area. Take Rampart Range for example. Motoheads united and established a sweet area that's motsly dedicated to moto's. That is what I want for mtn biking in Bldr CO.

    Might not happen in Boulder, but it looks like Clear Creek County(Idaho Springs) will have
    some mtn biking only trails.


    It might be, it could be...

  8. #8
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,146
    There just aren't that many mt. bikers interested in freeriding.

    I've been going to Keystone 1-2 time/wk this year and it isn't crowded even on weekends. You start seeing the same people there over and over.

    I wish it were different... with Keystone and WP stepping up, and long travel bikes becoming more popular it might change over the next few years. The resorts are going to make this a dh/fr destination like Whistler, and with that maybe we can also have some "Whistler XC"-like trails around eventually.

    BTW, calling the LR trail a "freeride" trail might be a misnomer, but if mt bikers eventually come up with a plan for a new fr trail with bigger features, we can point out that one already exists and has caused no "problems"
    .




    Strava: turn off your dork logger when you're not on sanctioned trails.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rky_mtn_srfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by davec113
    we can point out that one already exists and has caused no "problems"
    hahaa, you so funny

    Personally I just can't hack the i-70 drive, and $$$ for gas and a lift ticket to make Keystone or WP a viable option. I've ridden several of the resorts, definitely fun but my 5inch bike is a little under gunned for running a lift all day. waaa

    Thanks for the CCC link Jaysun, Idaho Springs is a reasonable drive, so I'll stay tuned on that one

  10. #10
    what nice teeth you have
    Reputation: nadinno78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    712

    ski resort liability

    Arn't the ski resorts protected from liability under state law. This was one major hurdle the ski areas had to get over to become succesfull. The state basically passed a law limiting the liability of the resorts when people get hurt/killed (some of this info gots printed on your lift ticket). With out this the colorado ski industry could barely function. The state could justify this because of the economic beneift the whole industry brings to the state of colorado. What I am curious about is if these limited liability laws cover the resorts during the summer and for mountain biking. My guess is, yes. Anyone a lawyer.

  11. #11
    what nice teeth you have
    Reputation: nadinno78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    712
    Colorado Ski laws

    http://www.skilaw.com/stateskilawart.htm#CO

    "Inherent dangers are defined to include ... collisions with natural and manmade objects "

    If the laws don't extend to biking maybe they can be ammended to include it. Petition anyone?

  12. #12
    Shattering Glass
    Reputation: dash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    707
    Troy says just build it and appoligize later when they accept it cause they don't want to piss off a large group of bikers by taking it down. There are a few spots in Boulder to apply this. Hell, I'm always micro arranging the local trails for better riding than say...hiking.

  13. #13
    Rolling
    Reputation: lidarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,119
    Is this thread about penises?

  14. #14
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,960
    Can't agree more.. It would be a beautiful thing to have a freeride park/trail somewhere near the metro. Even just a few acres of building space would be plenty for a nice range of progressive features. The way it stands now it's either head out to the ski lifts for a full-out day or snooze around the metro trails and enjoy the scenery. The metro really needs somewhere local to let folks work the technical skills and let noobs learn how to land some drops before pointing them downhill off a lift.

    It amazes me that CO park services are such sissies about this. Most major towns with only a hundredth of the available open space have significantly bigger stunts than anything we have locally. Hell, if someone wants to sue the USFS they can just go slip over the horse crap covering half of West Mag, bonk their head on a rock and catch giardia at the same time. There's nothing "natural" about the 3 tons of manure per mile they allow, but somehow riding off a few stunts made from downed lumber and stone is an issue.

  15. #15
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,960
    Quote Originally Posted by lidarman
    Is this thread about penises?
    Man, what kind of Freudian hang up do you have?

    PS.. mine's bigger

Posting Permissions

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