Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 120
  1. #1
    Beer Swilling Clyde
    Reputation: missoularider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    323

    Any recent news on Timberline?

    Hey guys, just wondering if anyone has any info on the progress going on at Timberline? From what I had seen last winter work was supposed to start this summer but haven't heard anything since then. I get all giddy when I think of lift access only an hour away! My next rig is going to be heavily influenced by the trails out there depending on if they are more freeride or downhill orientated either way I can't wait for next summer.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by missoularider
    Hey guys, just wondering if anyone has any info on the progress going on at Timberline? From what I had seen last winter work was supposed to start this summer but haven't heard anything since then. I get all giddy when I think of lift access only an hour away! My next rig is going to be heavily influenced by the trails out there depending on if they are more freeride or downhill orientated either way I can't wait for next summer.
    I new it was too good to be true when the initial announcement said there were plans to start trailbuilding this summer/ fall.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    585
    they have been building but they were stopped recently . Some concerns about something. I forget.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Hack
    they have been building but they were stopped recently . Some concerns about something. I forget.
    Cool, I didn't realize they had started digging.
    I only ride bikes to fill the time when I'm not skiing.

  5. #5
    it means 'no problem'
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    508
    There is some "opposition" to the project and they have engaged a law firm http://crag.org/ that is saying they have the intent to sue if the project goes forward.

    Send your comments to SUPPORT the project here:
    comments-pacificnorthwest-mthood-zigzag@fs.fed.us

    egads.
    "“May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view." - Edward Abbey

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,595
    I was perusing through the crag link sans soucie provided and found This to be quite interesting. I thought HUB was supposed to be bike friendly. If you attend this event at the HUB, a portion of the profits from your beer and food will go to crag.

    Edit...Looks like it already happened.
    I only ride bikes to fill the time when I'm not skiing.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Don't forget BARK. There is some crossover between staff of CRAG and BARK.

    http://www.bark-out.org/topic.php?id=Timberline

  8. #8
    it means 'no problem'
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by ride_nw
    Don't forget BARK. There is some crossover between staff of CRAG and BARK.

    http://www.bark-out.org/topic.php?id=Timberline

    ...and Friends of Mt. Hood:

    http://www.friendsofmounthood.org/fmh.htm

    Scroll down a little for their position on the Timberline Bike Park project.
    "“May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view." - Edward Abbey

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    258
    Yes, let's not build a bike park in a ski area, because we all know how little environmental damage a ski area does. It's the same thing as Forest Park - people (hikers) simply don't want to share, and they are willing to take their fight anywhere they feel threatened. It would be nice if Timberline would take the offensive and not let them spin and manipulate the situation as has been done with FP. Question them on their motives, call them out on their bs, then build the park!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by sans soucie
    ...and Friends of Mt. Hood:

    http://www.friendsofmounthood.org/fmh.htm

    Scroll down a little for their position on the Timberline Bike Park project.
    Wow.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    585
    vote with a bullet

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    87
    Was up there last week, here is a post from the NWTA forums about the trip -

    http://nw-trail.org/forum/trail-info...s/general/2093

  13. #13
    ronbo613
    Guest
    vote with a bullet
    Do you really think that is the solution to this (or any other) problem, especially with people in your own community?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charvey9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    358
    Last I heard, they will not make the final decision about the park until December. They are currently conducting the environmental impact studies.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    Here's a good article in opposition.
    http://goo.gl/XRKh

    Funny how we've all been talking about 16 miles of trail, but the NWTA links says they've flagged 25.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    258
    I like the part in the commentary about the negative affects on Skibowl. If Skibowl is really that worried, maybe they should have thought of building a bike park that was worth paying money to use. I can understand going there to do a DH race, but go there to just ride? No way. Look up 1/2 arse in the dictionary and you are likely to find a pic of Skibowl's mtb park.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Can anyone confirm this:

    Ironically, on mountain bike trails elsewhere in the Mount Hood National Forest, downhill riding is prohibited in order to “prevent erosion”, according to the Forest Service trail signage.
    Downhill riding is prohibited on other mountain bike trails in the MHNF? I was not aware of any directional trails around here -- are there any? I have yet to see one in this state.

    Even Sandy Ridge is "suggested" one-way but that way is downhill so they must be talking about something else (or making **** up).

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bubba13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    Here's a good article in opposition.
    http://goo.gl/XRKh

    Funny how we've all been talking about 16 miles of trail, but the NWTA links says they've flagged 25.
    Thanks for that link. Has anyone that supports the opposing view even spent any time in the area that the park would be built? I have, and it is far from pristine back country. (If they want a pristine mountain then level Timberline and remove all of the ski lifts and hiking trails from the mountain.) Hikers and summer snow users will not be affected at all above the treeline/lodge.

    Wow, using Ski Bowl as an argument? They really do not understand. How can we make them understand what is a good trail/park and what is not?

    I am all for riding closer to town and Sandy Ridge is a welcome improvement. It is a 35 mile drive each way though. Too bad Portland is not receptive to anything closer in.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Something really stands out on that site: they are proponents of increasing the number of hiking trails on mt hood. I'm not necessarily against it, but it seems odd to talk about the damage and destruction that would be caused from building bike trails in an existing commercial recreation area, but at the same time insist that cutting new trails through the pristine backcountry is somehow ok, and encourage more users in this fragile alpine environment.

    it would take a renewed commitment from the Forest Service to expand the trail network around the mountain, and this is the largest obstacle. The agency has been doing just the opposite for many years, allowing trails to fade into oblivion for lack of basic maintenance.

    But this is also where you can help: the Forest Service has the funding to provide more trails, yet needs strong public support to make trails a priority in agency budgets. Buying a forest pass simply isn’t enough, unfortunately.

    Make your opinion known, and don’t accept the “lack of funding” explanation. Instead, take a look at this comparison of funding for Mount Hood and a couple of well-known national parks, and simply ask that YOUR forest to be managed with trail recreation at the top of the priority list.
    Hey that's me! I want trail recreation at the top of the list too!!!!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    637
    Thanks for pointing that out, the level of hypocrisy is amazing...
    http://wyeastblog.wordpress.com/2010...springs-trail/

    Opposing a highly maintained and professionally built trail network in a concentrated area already heavily developed as a ski resort, then advocating for 5 miles of trail deep in the Mt Hood wilderness and criticizing the forest service for "allowing trails to fade into oblivion", or um, returning to nature because no one is using them. It shouldn't take a team of biologists to figure out which has the most ecological impact, or an economist to figure out which one benefits the greatest number of forest users. We need to start calling them on this elitist self-serving BS.

  21. #21
    MattSavage
    Reputation: mattsavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,464
    Oh my god... That is the most selfish, ignorant, hypocritical blog of all time... They're sooo upset about a few new trails at Timberline, yet they're proposing new trails and reroutes all over the place for hikers in the same ecological conditions. Not to mention the build, build, build mentality for the proposed National Park... New byways, new lodges, new trails, more people, drive, drive, drive, spew more pollution throughout the forest, more trash all over... In the meantime, push the bike park onto private land or into active timber harvest areas and build new facilitites instead of utilizing existing ones at a current recreation area...

    Such nonsense... I can't believe they're so blinded by selfish righteousnouss. They can't even get their captions right. That first photo is Black Rock, not Post... Sheesh...
    "I wrote a hit play! What have you ever done?!"

    Have Ashtray, Will Travel....

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    308
    Mt Hood? another Cascades volcano with that eerie, dank vibe? I say we tear it up and let everyone play hard on it till it recycles itself.

    If you don't quit squabbling and just go up there aand use it you're gonna lose it just like FP.

    Shred it!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    308
    Mt Hood? another Cascades volcano with that eerie, dank vibe? I say we tear it up and let everyone play hard on it till it recycles itself.

    If you don't quit squabbling and just go up there and use it you're gonna lose it just like FP.

    Shred it!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    I'm not seeing the hypocrisy angle. The guy (a mtn biker, btw) says why he doesn't think T-line is the best choice for a bike park and then presents several alternatives. I agree with him that the money would be better spent in Govy. It's been years since I've ridden there, is Skibowl beyond improving?

    The idea behind the Cooper Springs trail (which passes thru some very nice country) is to take camping pressure off the N side and Paradise. I think it's a great idea, but doubt it'll ever happen as nobody stands to make any money off it.

    And WRT to the National Park dream, I honestly don't think there's any reason to expect we'd (bikers) fare any better under that regime than we did under the Wilderness proposal. IOW, we'd be valuable during consensus building, but expendable afterwards.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I'm not seeing the hypocrisy angle. The guy (a mtn biker, btw) says why he doesn't think T-line is the best choice for a bike park and then presents several alternatives. I agree with him that the money would be better spent in Govy. It's been years since I've ridden there, is Skibowl beyond improving?

    The idea behind the Cooper Springs trail (which passes thru some very nice country) is to take camping pressure off the N side and Paradise. I think it's a great idea, but doubt it'll ever happen as nobody stands to make any money off it.
    There is plenty of hiking in other places, in fact there are some nice yet underused trails behind Skibowl. Why not hike and camp over there and take some pressure off mt hood?

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by ride_nw
    There is plenty of hiking in other places, in fact there are some nice yet underused trails behind Skibowl. Why not hike and camp over there and take some pressure off mt hood?
    I've poked around in both areas. IMO the proposed Cooper Springs treeline trail is definitely a prettier stretch of country than the backside of Skibowl. But why not both?

    Still, the big point in favor of improving the bike park at Skibowl is that there already is a bike park at Skibowl. (If that's what you're getting at.)
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I've poked around in both areas. IMO the proposed Cooper Springs treeline trail is definitely a prettier stretch of country than the backside of Skibowl. But why not both?

    Still, the big point in favor of improving the bike park at Skibowl is that there already is a bike park at Skibowl. (If that's what you're getting at.)
    Why not bike parks at both? Why is it ok to increase hiking and camping on mt hood but not cycling?

    Why not leave the "prettier stretch" of country alone? Would cutting a trail through it make it even prettier?

  28. #28
    MattSavage
    Reputation: mattsavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I've poked around in both areas. IMO the proposed Cooper Springs treeline trail is definitely a prettier stretch of country than the backside of Skibowl. But why not both?

    Still, the big point in favor of improving the bike park at Skibowl is that there already is a bike park at Skibowl. (If that's what you're getting at.)
    Calling the "bike park" at Ski Bowl is like throwing a fly fisherman in a ranchers stock pond and calling it the Metolious...

    I don't care where they build the bike park, as long as its not half assed. If T-Line is such an ecological big deal and it falls through, then they should team up with Ski Bowl and share the rewards. T-Line should invest in Ski Bowl and take a percentage back from their summer proceeds, win/win.
    "I wrote a hit play! What have you ever done?!"

    Have Ashtray, Will Travel....

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    Hey, I think lift-assisted biking is like fly-fishing with a grenade.

    I still think it'd be better sited at Skibowl. T-line is already a zoo in Summer. Skibowl doesn't have the summer skiing traffic, the hikers or the Lodge birds. It does have the permit, tte parking, the terrain and access to lodging and businesses in Govy camp. (Tthere'd be a big opportunity for a ride-in bike shop up there.) They'd just need to renew a few lifts (something long overdue) and build a few trails. Govy camp would be closer for the ambulances too.

    I'm not saying it'll happen, I just think it'd be a better deal for everyone. Everyone except the RLK corp.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    Hey, I think lift-assisted biking is like fly-fishing with a grenade.
    You should have just come out and said you are anti lift assist biking in the first place. I wish people would just cut to the chase. Enough with the smoke and mirrors. If you think DH is nothing but bad and want no part of it, just say so. If you think bikes are the devil's chariot and they have no place in the forest, just say so. Let me know where you stand. I respect differences in opinion but I hate beating around the bush.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I still think it'd be better sited at Skibowl. T-line is already a zoo in Summer. Skibowl doesn't have the summer skiing traffic, the hikers or the Lodge birds. It does have the permit, tte parking, the terrain and access to lodging and businesses in Govy camp. (Tthere'd be a big opportunity for a ride-in bike shop up there.) They'd just need to renew a few lifts (something long overdue) and build a few trails. Govy camp would be closer for the ambulances too.

    I'm not saying it'll happen, I just think it'd be a better deal for everyone. Everyone except the RLK corp.
    You're avoiding my question. Why is it ok to cut new hiking trails in a pristine alpine envrionment which will increase the number of hikers and campers in the area, but building a handful of bike trails in an already developed area is bad? I am directly questioning your statements with the same logic you are applying to mountain biking. If mountain bikers should use Skibowl for riding facilities since it already exists and is underutilized, why can't the same be said for hikers? There are hundreds ofmiles of hiking trails nearby why do you need more of them?

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noparking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I still think it'd be better sited at Skibowl. T-line is already a zoo in Summer. Skibowl doesn't have the summer skiing traffic, the hikers or the Lodge birds. It does have the permit, tte parking, the terrain and access to lodging and businesses in Govy camp. (Tthere'd be a big opportunity for a ride-in bike shop up there.) They'd just need to renew a few lifts (something long overdue) and build a few trails. Govy camp would be closer for the ambulances too.

    I'm not saying it'll happen, I just think it'd be a better deal for everyone. Everyone except the RLK corp.
    T-line in the summer really isn't that bad and no worse then it is in the winter, skibowl barely has enough money to stay open let alone update their lifts. As far as building new trails... they're have years to improve their trails and expand, but once again they're not willing to put the time and money towards the project. Skibowl had their chance to capitalize on the lack to riding options for DH riding in the area, it's time for someone to step up to the plate and build a proper DH park(gravitylogic). Either way G camp would benefit from a bike park at either locations.
    Voice your support for Timberline Bike Park
    http://www.timberlinelodge.com/mountainbike/

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by ride_nw
    You should have just come out and said you are anti lift assist biking in the first place. I wish people would just cut to the chase. Enough with the smoke and mirrors. If you think DH is nothing but bad and want no part of it, just say so. If you think bikes are the devil's chariot and they have no place in the forest, just say so. Let me know where you stand. I respect differences in opinion but I hate beating around the bush.
    Where I stand it that I'm opposed to what I consider to be excessive development at T-line. I ride trails every weekend. Have since the 80s. I've ridden lift assist at Mammoth and once for a race at Skiblow. Someday I'd like to go to Whistler to ride. Love skiing there!

    You're avoiding my question. Why is it ok to cut new hiking trails in a pristine alpine envrionment which will increase the number of hikers and campers in the area, but building a handful of bike trails in an already developed area is bad? I am directly questioning your statements with the same logic you are applying to mountain biking. If mountain bikers should use Skibowl for riding facilities since it already exists and is underutilized, why can't the same be said for hikers? There are hundreds ofmiles of hiking trails nearby why do you need more of them?
    Simply put, my spin is that, wrt to biking, T-line isn't developed at all. At least not yet. Like I said, I think it's kind of a zoo in the summer, while Govy by comparison is dead. Increasing traffic at T-line will only make that situation worse. Developing a great park at Skibow would benefit a wider range of players, bring money and traffic to a spot that sorely needs it and preserve the traffic status quo at T-line.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    Where I stand it that I'm opposed to what I consider to be excessive development at T-line. I ride trails every weekend. Have since the 80s. I've ridden lift assist at Mammoth and once for a race at Skiblow. Someday I'd like to go to Whistler to ride. Love skiing there!



    Simply put, my spin is that, wrt to biking, T-line isn't developed at all. At least not yet. Like I said, I think it's kind of a zoo in the summer, while Govy by comparison is dead. Increasing traffic at T-line will only make that situation worse. Developing a great park at Skibow would benefit a wider range of players, bring money and traffic to a spot that sorely needs it and preserve the traffic status quo at T-line.
    I still don't see why it's ok to increase the number of humans visiting the pristine alpine backcountry of mt hood by means of cutting new trails and creating more locations for hiking and camping. I can only imagine the vast amount of destruction that will be caused by having an increase in the number of people hiking off trail, leaving human waste, disturbing wildlife, gathering firewood for campfires, and vandalism. Not to mention the CO2 emissions from all of the driving required to reach the high elevation trailheads. Wouldn't this development be much better suited to a lower elevation area that has existing yet underutilized resources in place? Why can't you hikers leave mt hood alone? If you truly want a backcountry experience why do you need a trail? If you truly want to preserve the mountain why do you insist on cutting new trails and establishing more camp sites on it?

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DJ Giggity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I'm not seeing the hypocrisy angle. The guy (a mtn biker, btw) says why he doesn't think T-line is the best choice for a bike park and then presents several alternatives. I agree with him that the money would be better spent in Govy. It's been years since I've ridden there, is Skibowl beyond improving? .

    I see you have moved on from strawman arguments to false choice arguments. No one is proposing upgrades to Skibowl or Government Camp. Timberline is footing the bill for this and they are not going to develop outside of their area. There is no other option so don't pretend there is.

    Timberline wants us there. We want to be there. The businesses in Govy want the extra traffic and I am pretty sure the Forest Service wants this to take stress off of trails they have to maintain. Everybody wants this to happen except for a few envro nitwits and elitist hikers. The hate of the anti-bike crowd should be recognized for what it is. It is their personal problem and should not be given much credence.
    Only two infinite things exist: the universe and stupidity. And, I am unsure of the universe
    - Albert Einstein

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    297
    I agree. Using G-Camp economics against a bike park on T-line is a strawman. A well thought out, designed, and supported bike park at T-line or Skibowl will benefit the town in the summer. Period. Sure, some people might pay the preminum for a beer and burger at the Lodge that wouldn't go to a joint in town. But, really, G-camp gets an increase in spending regardless of location. Skibowl could have made it work. They didn't Timberline wants to, I don't see a persuasive arguement to change my opinion. Some hikers being weirded out by folks with big bikes and pads is no different from skiers being weired out by 'crazy kids' on snowboards in years past. They just ned to learn to coexist. Hikers still won't have to worry about bikers barreling down on them on the Timberline trail.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    I'm just not seeing how 15 miles of trail could be worth doing all that often. Especially given that it'll cost $40 or whatever to ride. Considering that there are already nice places to shuttle that are free and lots closer to town, I almost don't see how T-line couldn't be planning on expanding this operation.. That they've flagged 25 miles when the scoping doc asked for 15 says Trojan horse to me. Don't get me wrong, I think it'll happen. I just don't think it's a good idea.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    26
    If Timberline gets approval for the bike park I'm going to start shopping for a condo in Government Camp. How's that for an economic benefit? That means I'm staying up there, spending money at the business there, bringing my friends who will also spend money, etc.

    "I'm just not seeing how 15 miles of trail could be worth doing all that often."
    "Considering that there are already nice places to shuttle that are free and lots closer to town"

    Okay, so you're saying that 15 miles of DH specific lift accessed rail would be too boring but shuttling the same 1-5 miles trails over and over again isn't?

    Well designed DH trail systems are fun for a long, long time. I don't ever remember any of my runs down A-line at Whistler or In Deep getting boring.

    Also, when I consider how much money and time is spent shuttling it becomes obvious that riding the lift is much more economical.

    How about this: if you don't want to ride the trails at T-Line then don't. But, don't act like the area isn't already developed.

    Again, are you some kind of anti-mountain biking mountain biker Jam esp? The congnitive dissonance must be really distracting for you.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I'm just not seeing how 15 miles of trail could be worth doing all that often. Especially given that it'll cost $40 or whatever to ride. Considering that there are already nice places to shuttle that are free and lots closer to town, I almost don't see how T-line couldn't be planning on expanding this operation.. That they've flagged 25 miles when the scoping doc asked for 15 says Trojan horse to me. Don't get me wrong, I think it'll happen. I just don't think it's a good idea.
    Why would anyone buy a season pass to ski/board there in the winter? It's super expensive with a long drive. Why would anyone go to a lift accessed ski resort in the first place when there is plenty of backcountry available to anyone with skins or a snowmobile (for shuttling)?

    It's ok if it doesn't sound like something you would be into. We are telling you it makes a ton of sense for a lot of us, and it is something we really want. I would buy a season pass in a heartbeat. There is nowhere closer to home for me that has the terrain and environment being proposed.

    Remember how you said you rode DH at mammoth once and enjoy skiing at Whistler in the winter so you'd also be interested in trying Whistler on a bike one day? I take it this is the extent of your experience with the lift assisted cycling scene.

    What if my XC experience was that I rode McKenzie river once 10 years ago, but ride shuttles every weekend and enjoy riding my motorcycle at Browns Camp, you wouldn't expect me to be in tune with the XC scene as you know it, would you?
    Last edited by ride_nw; 10-11-2010 at 03:03 PM. Reason: typo

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    630
    I'm starting to wonder if Jam even bikes. Maybe he's just trying to distract us from having meaningful conversations that might yield results.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noparking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    I'm just not seeing how 15 miles of trail could be worth doing all that often. Especially given that it'll cost $40 or whatever to ride. Considering that there are already nice places to shuttle that are free and lots closer to town, I almost don't see how T-line couldn't be planning on expanding this operation.. That they've flagged 25 miles when the scoping doc asked for 15 says Trojan horse to me. Don't get me wrong, I think it'll happen. I just don't think it's a good idea.
    First you say you don't understand the appeal and the next thing you say is how much you'd love to go ride whistler? 40 bucks for a day of riding isn't bad at all, think of the gas money you spend on your car to shuttle and wear & tear. If you're worried about the cost you're in the wrong sport, or just by a season pass. Good places to shuttle? last time I was in Whistler we rode over 20k feet a day, where's a place around here that I can do that w/o driving 8hrs to do? You don't think it's a good idea to do at T-line, but just fine at skibowl.... Doesn't sound like you've put much thought into your argument.
    Voice your support for Timberline Bike Park
    http://www.timberlinelodge.com/mountainbike/

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    26
    Bikeportland.org has WSBOB. We have Jam esp.

  42. #42
    MattSavage
    Reputation: mattsavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by noparking
    You don't think it's a good idea to do at T-line, but just fine at skibowl.... Doesn't sound like you've put much thought into your argument.
    In his defense, I think he has put alot of thought into his argument. Unfortunately it doesn't appear very valid to most of us...
    "I wrote a hit play! What have you ever done?!"

    Have Ashtray, Will Travel....

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jam esp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    95
    Guys, it's a discussion forum. Surely riders have disagreed here before now.

    Quote Originally Posted by noparking
    First you say you don't understand the appeal and the next thing you say is how much you'd love to go ride whistler? 40 bucks for a day of riding isn't bad at all, think of the gas money you spend on your car to shuttle and wear & tear. If you're worried about the cost you're in the wrong sport, or just by a season pass. Good places to shuttle? last time I was in Whistler we rode over 20k feet a day, where's a place around here that I can do that w/o driving 8hrs to do? You don't think it's a good idea to do at T-line, but just fine at skibowl.... Doesn't sound like you've put much thought into your argument.
    Mammoth had 70 miles of trail, Whistler must have at least twice that, doesn't it? I don't really know so I'm asking: Is there another lift-accessed bike park with only 15 miles of track anywhere?

    My question was only partially about whether you'd actually use the 15 miles. The larger part of the question was whether anyone actually believes that RLK isn't already planning on expanding the program beyond their permit boundary. With a couple of buses they could effectively take over a ton of trail real estate, like the Glade, Crosstown and Pioneer Bridle trails for just a couple of examples. That's what I meant by it being a Trojan horse, to guys who're going to use (or guys with a stake in it) it must look like a gift. But to those of us who probably won't use it much, but do use those trails currently, it might look more like a lot to give up. .

    The best argument against Skibowl is that it's owned by a total fawking dirtbag, which is a shame but sadly can't be helped.
    "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
    -- Mark Twain

  44. #44
    MattSavage
    Reputation: mattsavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    Guys, it's a discussion forum. Surely riders have disagreed here before now.



    Mammoth had 70 miles of trail, Whistler must have at least twice that, doesn't it? I don't really know so I'm asking: Is there another lift-accessed bike park with only 15 miles of track anywhere?

    My question was only partially about whether you'd actually use the 15 miles. The larger part of the question was whether anyone actually believes that RLK isn't already planning on expanding the program beyond their permit boundary. With a couple of buses they could effectively take over a ton of trail real estate, like the Glade, Crosstown and Pioneer Bridle trails for just a couple of examples.
    15 miles is a start, everyone has to start somewhere... The Whistler Park encompasses some 2500 acres, opposed to Timberlines proposed 10... I will ride all 15 miles, over and over again.

    As far as their Special Use Permit boundary goes, I'm sure it's written into their lease, so that would require renegotiation. I highly doubt they would "take over" those trails. They can't even drive cats or maintenance vehicles beyond the boundary without permission. Just like in the winter those areas are "out of bounds". They don't maintain it or patrol it, but there's probably going to be nothing stopping anyone from continuing on down the Glade from within the park. Whistler has tons of trails accessible during the summer that are out of bounds yet accessible from the park and the summit chairs. They don't maintain them or patrol them. I'm sure the same would apply here.
    "I wrote a hit play! What have you ever done?!"

    Have Ashtray, Will Travel....

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    630
    Quote Originally Posted by Jam esp
    Guys, it's a discussion forum. Surely riders have disagreed here before now.



    Mammoth had 70 miles of trail, Whistler must have at least twice that, doesn't it? I don't really know so I'm asking: Is there another lift-accessed bike park with only 15 miles of track anywhere?

    My question was only partially about whether you'd actually use the 15 miles. The larger part of the question was whether anyone actually believes that RLK isn't already planning on expanding the program beyond their permit boundary. With a couple of buses they could effectively take over a ton of trail real estate, like the Glade, Crosstown and Pioneer Bridle trails for just a couple of examples. That's what I meant by it being a Trojan horse, to guys who're going to use (or guys with a stake in it) it must look like a gift. But to those of us who probably won't use it much, but do use those trails currently, it might look more like a lot to give up. .

    The best argument against Skibowl is that it's owned by a total fawking dirtbag, which is a shame but sadly can't be helped.
    Thanks for being honest and finally letting us know your agenda. You're afraid you'll lose access to trails you currently ride. That a fair concern. From what I heard it sounded like T-line wasn't planning on blocking access to those trails.

    And, yes, 15 miles of well designed trails would be really fun. Also, it'd be easy to add more miles within the same area without impacting other parties.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    258
    On a semi related note:

    Watched an episode of Oregon field Guide last week (don't know why, I don't really care for it.) The episode had a group of birdwatchers who go on a weekend long bird watching fest from one side of the state to the other. They pile in huge vans (which can't get much in terms of mpg) to drive across one of the largest states in the nation to stare at birds (talk about invasion of privacy!). But they probably don't want mountain bikes to ride on trails, be it Timberline or FP, because of the environmental impact. (Perhaps a bit presumptuous on my part, maybe some of them are mtb'ers.) Yeah (spoken in Bill Lumberg's voice).

  47. #47
    MattSavage
    Reputation: mattsavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by lil'stink
    On a semi related note:

    Watched an episode of Oregon field Guide last week (don't know why, I don't really care for it.) The episode had a group of birdwatchers who go on a weekend long bird watching fest from one side of the state to the other. They pile in huge vans (which can't get much in terms of mpg) to drive across one of the largest states in the nation to stare at birds (talk about invasion of privacy!).
    Well, at least they carpooled...
    "I wrote a hit play! What have you ever done?!"

    Have Ashtray, Will Travel....

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    9
    This article about the Timberline MTB part referes to a trail called "Timberline to town".

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/terryrich...eeks_to_b.html

    I've been on the lower portion of this trail and was told by the builder that the entire trail was completed ~2 weeks ago. He said the top of the trail goes out to the north of the blossom chair lift. I hope to go find it this weekend.

  49. #49
    Big Test Icycles
    Reputation: Hangtime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,432
    I personally can't wait to drop my hard earned cash on lift passes, food and gas to get there and back. Not to mention any future bike shops that may spring up. There's nothing like supporting local economies.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noparking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by Hangtime
    I personally can't wait to drop my hard earned cash on lift passes, food and gas to get there and back. Not to mention any future bike shops that may spring up. There's nothing like supporting local economies.
    I'd buy my season pass right now if I could.
    Voice your support for Timberline Bike Park
    http://www.timberlinelodge.com/mountainbike/

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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