Yuba Expeditions issues, trail work...

[bullit71]

http://www.yubaexpeditions.com/

What the? 3% tax on profits? What is the Forest Service doing? Are we to be alarmed at what is going on in Dville?

Anyone know about this?

Thanks

[Melt]

i wonder if they are going to tax DO as well?

the forest service are being a bunch of haters though ... anyone remember how dope butcher ranch used to be before the reroutes?

[bullit71]

It's funny - I was just checking Yuba for the latest in Dville since the season is about to begin and I read that.

Here we go....

[Stumpy_Steve]

wow... how lame. and i love that place, too!

[baycat]

More excited to hear about the construction of new trails. So now can we do the nice 15+ mile shuttle plus that North Yuba trail?

Be more than happy to pay more for the shuttle if it helps YE or DO. But I would hate to see a limitation put on shuttles and riders.

[NoBalance]

I'm not sure how they justify an arbitrary 3% tax. Yuba and DO don't actually "use" the trail system ... they just provide bus service from point A to point B to private individuals.

I have not heard about a blanket 3% tax on all businesses that profit from visitors that come to Downieville who might at some point decide to use Forest Service facilities.

I really hate when the government just comes up with new taxes out of the flippin' blue. I mean, don't they have a fiscal responsibility to pay for the program and conduct user-conflict studies WITHOUT an "oh by the way" tax/fee/bill? Sounds like rubbish to me.

[SinglePivot]

It's disguised as a commercial use (yuba, dville shuttles) tax to pay for the forest service guy to ride his dirtbike on the trails and probably to fund some of the money needed for the enforcement of online campsite reservation.

Originally Posted by NoBalance

I'm not sure how they justify an arbitrary 3% tax. Yuba and DO don't actually "use" the trail system ... they just provide bus service from point A to point B to private individuals.

I have not heard about a blanket 3% tax on all businesses that profit from visitors that come to Downieville who might at some point decide to use Forest Service facilities.

I really hate when the government just comes up with new taxes out of the flippin' blue. I mean, don't they have a fiscal responsibility to pay for the program and conduct user-conflict studies WITHOUT an "oh by the way" tax/fee/bill? Sounds like rubbish to me.

[renderedtoast]

Man, i love D-ville. I hope the Forest Service doesn't start trying to pull some BS on the mountain bike population. We are what makes that area. Plus, the YE peeps are the best. Flick has helped me out more times than I can count. Damn, this sucks....

[rensho]

Yeah, and those shops are the ones that MAJORLY maintain and build new trails up there. Gee, charge for the camping spots that FEWER people will have reason to go use.

[budgie]

Limiting shuttles and riders: what crap! As for the 3% tax, I don't get what the problem is (other than it being ridiculous bureaucratic nonsense, as others have said). That's $0.60 on top of a $20 shuttle fee: pass it on to the customer, along with the increase that sure to come with $3.50 gas prices this season. Sucks for us, but better than DO or YE going out of business.

[Rb]

This is crap.

No taxation without representation!!!

Who's the "local" congress[wo]man?

[zorg]

Originally Posted by somepeteguy

No. You are mistaken.

"The FS wants to impose a 3% tax on YUBA's gross revenues from shuttles and bike demos, which is a sizeable [sic] amount of the net profit."

Someone is obviously having trouble understanding the difference between revenue and profit.

It's more serious than you apparently think it is.

Assuming that Yuba makes a 10% net profit margin, that 3% (if not passed on) would be 30% of Yuba's profits. Since I'm guessing that any business in Dville is probably hanging by a thread (or should I say a tread?), anything that harms the mountain biking business is bad for the town.

[proto2000]

Originally Posted by somepeteguy

No. You are mistaken.

"The FS wants to impose a 3% tax on YUBA's gross revenues from shuttles and bike demos, which is a sizeable [sic] amount of the net profit."

Someone is obviously having trouble understanding the difference between revenue and profit.

It's more serious than you apparently think it is.

If one was to start a non profit org in the area.........

[EBrider]

Originally Posted by proto2000

If one was to start a non profit org in the area.........

The tax is on revenue, not profit. So it wouldn't matter if it were a not for profit.

[rensho]

It does say gross revenues on their website. The money goes towards a piece of dung, and doesn't help the trails any as far as maintenance or building new trails. That piece of dung would also possibly go to limit the number of shuttles ran per day/week/month. Nice!

Here son, you need to pay me from your salary so I can build your guillotine .

[NoBalance]

Bah. Bring out the lawyers man. Its a shuttle on PAVED road. What people do with their bikes they will never be able to tax so this is their way to try and get some money. It doesn't pass my stink test.

If it was a company renting boats at one of the lakes, then I'd understand.

[LWright]

the bike shops should not have to pay anymore than hiking and equestrian outfitters, or better yet those of use who use the area could buy a green sticker.

[cppcboy]

I wonder if white water operations have to pay this tax as well, they shuttle the river.

[otbp_nocal]

I guess the Forest Circus moved the date up a few years: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=337333

Did you guys send in your letters before October 5th, 2007?

[bigboulder]

Um, while I hate to see completely arbitrary taxation as this appears to be....

I don't see anything that supperts the statement that the FS will be "limiting riders" in the D-ville area. This does not in anyway affect our ability to access the riding in the D-Ville area....until....they start with the access fees and or parking fees that will directley affect riders.

All that being said. Yuba Exp has built a business that serves the MTB community well. They bring in a lot of tourist dollars that spill over to the entire D-Ville community. Everyone will lose if they are unable to keep thier business profitable.

This is the direction that the Peoples Republic of California is going and going and going.

and that folks.....is my one political statement for 2008.

fock the guvment

[Prettym1k3]

Make sure you kill the only good business (bicycling) in that entire town...

...well, bicycling, and meth.

[TahoeBC]

I do not believe this is uncommon for the FS to do, there probably just catching up with them.

Who here would stop utilizing the shuttle services in Downieville if they passed the 3% cost on to us? Gas prices have gone up more than that.

I think they will be just fine.

[grrrah]

I would still pay the fee, but I would also probably reduce the number of shuttle runs on a given weekend if it got to be too much. Maybe I will finally do that climb.


Maybe Yuba can start selling $20 stickers that include a free shuttle run

[TahoeBC]

2. Discussion on the United States Forest Service imposed outfitter and guide fee for bicycle and trail use on the Yuba River Ranger District.

Mr. Joe Chavez provided background on the purpose of putting the shuttle bike businesses under permit. There was an update of the California Code of Regulations which May 25, 2007
changed the definition of guiding to include transporting people. The Organic Act of 1897 set forth the requirement for an agency to regulate occupancy and uses of the National Forest. It has been the Forest Service’s policy from the beginning to regulate and charge for the commercial use of public land.
Mr. Chavez continued to describe the history of these permits and the reasons for implementing the fee against guiding and outfitting businesses.
Ms. Masquelier addressed the matter noting that it is not their intent to cause any economic harm to the community. They are working on numerous projects that will benefit the economic viability of Downieville. She expects that the fee (three percent of the gross fees collected) increase would be 45 cents for the transportation and a $2 increase for bike rentals. Ms. Masquelier further noted that 85 % of the fees generated can be returned and used locally.
The Director of Planning requested clarification on how the Forest Service distinguishes the three percent gross revenues and how are they assured that they are only applying the fee to those only using the federal lands. Mr. Chavez responded explaining that they will have auditors who will look for consistency and shops can choose to separate their books to benefit them so they don’t have to pay as much as not all bike rentals will be assessed the three percent fee.
Ms. Masquelier noted that the Forest Service will not put the permit into place until next March, so the bike shop can increase their fee for this summer.
Mr. Greg Williams, Yuba Expeditions addressed the Board noting that there is going to be more money spent on the administration of the three percent fee rather than what is going to be brought in. Mr. Williams further explained that the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship has contributed 12,000 hours on the Downieville trail system, so the money that is going to be collected will be taken out of the Stewardship which will in turn take away from the trail system.
Ms. Masquelier responded noting that the Forest Service is very grateful for the work the Stewardship has done.
Mr. Williams further described other outfits in Tahoe who are under a road permit fee which he believes the Forest Service could do for Yuba Expeditions.
Mr. Chavez further explained that the Forest Service is not able to except volunteerism for favoritism and it is the Forest Services responsibility to treat everyone equitably across the nation.
Supervisor Whitley expressed her concerns that we are taxing people twice for using the forest.
Ms. Masquelier further provide an explanation of the three percent tax. May 25, 2007
Mr. Ron Heard, Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship expressed his concerns pertaining to why the Forest Service is charging this fee to Yuba Expeditions, noting that it strikes him odd that there is no exception for the very group that has gone out and volunteered 12,000 hours.
In response to Chairman Huebner’s inquiry, Mr. Chavez explained that this isn’t targeting one shop, rather this fee is done nationally. Mr. Chavez continued to note that putting commercial businesses under permit has been a normal standard and the Forest Service is trying to manage according to their regulations.
Mr. Williams noted that this is punishing them as they are providing a service, rather a road use permit similar to the one used in the Tahoe Basin would be much better rather than an outfitter and guide.
Ms. Masquelier noted that the Forest Service offered a compromise that they wouldn’t start the permit until next March. This will allow Yuba Expeditions to have all summer to collect the fee so it doesn’t come straight out of their pocket.
Following considerable discussion pertaining to the three percent tax on Yuba Expeditions the Board recommended Mr. Chavez contact the Tahoe Basin to find out how they are managing to use the road use permit in order to determine whether this is an option for Yuba Expeditions.
3. Discussion on the Off Highway Vehicle Route Designation Project pertaining to non-street legal vehicle access to Tahoe National Forest maintenance level 3 roads.
Mr. Sam Wilbanks, Sierraville District Ranger explained that state law prohibits the use of off highway vehicles on many gravel roads which meant that many level 3 roads could not be used by unlicensed vehicles. The Forest Service looked at three maintenance level 3 roads to keep graded for vehicle passenger use; however, what they are faced with is if they maintain these roads for passenger use than unlicensed off highway vehicles cannot use them. Mr. Wilbanks continued to note that they may have an option on the lower standard level 3 roads by not maintaining these roads and then the roads could be used by a pickup or unlicensed off highway vehicles. There will probably be some level three roads that won’t be available; however, they can mitigate some of these by making them level two roads.
Discussion ensued pertaining to liability issues if the roads aren’t maintained and there not being any more enforcement on these roads than what there is currently. May 25, 2007
Following discussion the Board requested Mr. Wilbanks provide an update to the Board on which roads the Forest Service will be designating as level 3 or level 2 roads.
At 11:25 a.m., with no further business, Chairman Huebner adjourned the meeting.

[Melt]

Originally Posted by LWright

the bike shops should not have to pay anymore than hiking and equestrian outfitters, or better yet those of use who use the area could buy a green sticker.

my dad actually suggested this years ago that mtn bikers should have to purchase a green sticker or something of that nature ... my response was that roadies should have to get full registration ... of course his counter arguement is that road bikers dont actually cause any damage to the infrastructure, and that mountain bikers are the sole cause of erosion and reroutes of the butcher ranch rail.

Originally Posted by bigboulder

until....they start with the access fees and or parking fees that will directley affect riders.

cant remember where i heard this, but apparently the forest service is trying to come up with a way to charge parking at a number of trailheads.

[bigboulder]

Thank you so much for posting this....I know I could have found that myself but...

Priceless!

Excellent Read!

Irony!

Clarity.....

doing any riding lately?

[budgie]

Originally Posted by TahoeBC

There was an update of the California Code of Regulations which May 25, 2007 changed the definition of guiding to include transporting people....Mr. Chavez continued to describe the history of these permits and the reasons for implementing the fee against guiding and outfitting businesses.

Hard to argue against this since one business identifies themselves as an "Outfitter," the other as providing "Expeditions." What about a name change? "Downieville Taxi-to-the-top-and-then-you're-on-your-own-mate." Bureaucrats live for stupid little terminology distinctions like this.

[NoBalance]

Another arbitrary, unilateral change: There was an update of the California Code of Regulations which May 25, 2007 changed the definition of guiding to include transporting people.

Plus, there is no "guiding" involved from what I recall.

And the "thanks for fixing the trails, we appreciate it but we cant favor you just because you, well, put 12,000 hours of work into our parks. pay up, b*tches!" Basically the govt does not believe in volunteerism in their park system and prefers to control any action via fees and taxes, regardless of whether or not they are necessary or related.

I'm typically pretty darned left-winged but this stuff is just overkill. Let the community fix the trail system rather than unnecessarily handing over the responsibility to the govt.

Too bad this info is coming to us so late in the game ... there aint much we can do right now if things are already concluded.

[zorg]

Originally Posted by budgie

Hard to argue against this since one business identifies themselves as an "Outfitter," the other as providing "Expeditions." What about a name change? "Downieville Taxi-to-the-top-and-then-you're-on-your-own-mate." Bureaucrats live for stupid little terminology distinctions like this.

If the bottom line is that we have to pay another $0.50 per shuttle, then it's not a big deal. It sucks, but it's not the end of the world, as long as there are no restrictions on the number of shuttles.

At the end of the day, it still smacks of heavy handedness from the FS though.

[TahoeBC]

Originally Posted by bigboulder

doing any riding lately?

Yes

[rensho]

May limit riders.

"The funds collected under this program will be used to pay a FS employee to administer the program and to conduct "user-conflict" studies, not for needed trail maintenance or rehabilitation- that task is left to our local non-profit, the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship. Under this agreement, the FS would be able to dictate how many customers YUBA caters to in a season, as well as define the days and times of shuttle operations. These new fees and restrictions will no doubt force YUBA to raise prices and reduce the number of trips, which could eventually lead to YUBA closing it's doors."

I wonder if this is Yuba's own biased interp of the meetings/notes...
It sure is a different read than what TahoeBC posted an excerpt of.

Agreed that $0.60 added to each shuttle is a non issue. The price of gas going through roof, that's another story for Yuba.

[Melt]

plus yuba rides diesels which is probably up to $4 / gal up there

[fritzaholic]

Originally Posted by grrrah

Maybe Yuba can start selling $20 stickers that include a free shuttle run

Would that still be revenue? Or is the taxed revenue only on the suttle runs? So if I buy a YE T-shirt does the FS get a nickle from that transaction??

[snowjnky]

I guess it is time to climb.
I will still spend money, maybe not on shuttles. Between me and the guys and gals I ride with we spent at least $20,000 last year in downieville. I rather get the workout than give my money to the money grubbin FS

[Fast Eddy]

Originally Posted by Melt

plus yuba rides diesels which is probably up to $4 / gal up there

On my way home on Sat the average price of diesel between Sac and San Jo was about $4.15, so I'll bet your estimate is low. They have a mix of gas and diesel. I'm sure the gassers use enough additional fuel so the price diff is a wash.

3.97 to 4.59 right now: http://www.sanfrangasprices.com/index.aspx?fuel=D

[MtnBikerDan]

How many other outfitters operating in the FS system are there that are paying this tax?

Are the Sno-cat / Heli ski outfits hit with the same tax?

What about Tahoe outfitters? are they taxed the 3% to shuttle folks on the TRT?

Does the Backcountry in Truckee pay the tax to take people BC skiing in the Nat forest?

Does ASI?

or AAI?

Is it happening at Snowshoe Mtn?

Angel Fire?

Sedona?

Mtn Bike Oregon?

Cog Wild?

Western Spirit?

How about the loggers? are they taxed for the environmental rape and spew of toxics?

Or the hunters poisoning the soil with their lead? or redneck gun freaks killing TV's and Toyotas with their assault rifles?

This notion stinks and in the current state of the economy acts like this will further curb any sort of economic stimulus.

Mtn bikers pulled D-ville out of the gutter and further provided the catalyst to foster an environment of active use of an grossly underutilized natural recreation resource - NATIONWIDE.

The Gov't better be unilateral with this. I think I'll be calling some outfitters out of state with that question.

[Norcalgeek41]

If the tax doesn't get passed I would bet anyone that a trail use fee will be around the corner. I rode Kettle Morraine in Wisconsin for years while living in Chicago and paid my annual parking and trail fee and Wisc state parks fee. Total cost was about 30 bucks. If the money truly went toward trail upkeep or toward helping Downieville out, I'd pay it. I don't get why the FS would penalize a business for contributing to local growth/economy. Do the equestrian people pay to use the trail system?

[Internal14]

How about YE lower the shuttle fee to like $5. And leave a big ol Tip Jar on the counter. I'd gladly pay $5 for the shuttle and drop a $20 on the floor by accident, which then they'd find when cleaning up at the end of the day and stuff into their pockets without the long arm of the greedy somnabizthes FS.
Time to stop being 'by-the-book" good business peoples and run a "Cash Drawer" that you pay for gas and vehicle maintanence with. No ones the wiser.

You didn't hear that from me though...

[thomasmunka63@hotmail.com]

the government is soooooooo full of s--t
like holy f---ing s--t, do they think were that stupid?

i hope they're smart enough to realize that without bikers, all the jobs in that town are done with

....and 3% isn't that much...... i'd pay 13$ for my shuttle run instead of 10$

[cppcboy]

It's amazing that they will use money from a business to create regulations that will eventually kill the the hand that feeds them. YE is the reason people are able to enjoy riding in the area. On slow days they close up shop and do trail work. They are the force behind the SBTS, these people are truly passionate about preservation of the area, unlike the *****es who mine the area for gold and pollute the water ways. Please look at the video put out by the Outdoor Alliance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62ndawMJPZY

[yuba man]

I wish this was a publicity stunt on the part of YUBA, but things do not look good for the town of Downieville and it’s knobby driven economy. I’ll start with facts and opinions and see what it leads to:

1. The Downeiville Trail System is designated OHV motorized, multiple-use. OHV has a State run “Green Sticker” program that is completely disfunctional when it comes to allocating maintenance funds. The Yuba River District has not received any of these OHV funds for 6 years now, leaving our trails without any funding and without a management plan.
2. Mountain bikers are by far the largest use group on the Downieville Trail System. The FS Public Service Officer believes that this quantity of mountain bike use is displacing other potential trail users and not providing “equal opportunity”.
3. The FS wants a 3% tax on gross revenues from shuttles, as well as 3% of gross revenue from bike demos, as this equipment is used, or could potentially be used, on federal property. No other shop that rents equipment is subject to such a tax, which could set a precedent for the entire outdoor industry.
4. Sierra County taxes all use permits that are issued by the FS for operations within Sierra County. So, now the 3% is really 6%. The County does not support the FS 3% tax, but if the FS permit is successful, then the County must charge the tax.
5. Pay attention, this is the kicker- the FS wants to put limits on the number of clients YUBA can cater to in a season, as well as the number of trips and to which location those trips can take place. The FS would also have the ability to decide the “operating season” for YUBA. These are the factors that will truly dictate how much a shuttle will cost you.
6. NONE of the taxes/fees collected are used for trail maintenance. 85% of the fees collected are used to pay the same Public Service Officer to conduct user conflict studies and to administer the permit. The remaining 15% goes into the general fund back in Washington DC.
7. The Yuba River District has NO budget for maintaining over 150 miles of trails. This 3% fee would provide an excellent funding source for trail maintenance and upkeep on the Downieville Trail System. Perhaps enough funds would be collected to construct new trails that would spread users out, thereby reducing the impact to the Downieville Trail System and enhancing recreational opportunities.
8. The maintenance and restoration of the Downieville Trail System has been handled almost entirely by the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship, which has through volunteer work days and a paid Trail Crew, contributed over 18,000 labor hours to the Downeiville Trail System. So, while the FS does not need the mountain bike shops, they do need the Stewardship.

That’s all I can take for now. There’s a meeting in the morning with the Sierra County Economic Development Board in Sierraville. The focus for myself, YUBA, and the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship, will be to develop a strategy that creates local jobs, protects our natural and economic resources, enhances our community and strengthens our economy.

I’ll keep you posted if there’s additional interest on the thread.

Meanwhile the NEW North Yuba trail is looking sweet. Join the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship on April 12th for a volunteer work day and help build Downieville's only non-motorized singletrack

[otbp_nocal]

All I have to say is FKNA! Wow. I try to look at this without bias (from the Government's standpoint), and it still doesn't make any reasonable sense. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Where do they stand on self-shuttling? Is a toll road and parking attendant in the works?

Sorry to hear this, Yuba guys. Hopefully somebody, somewhere will get this figured out in your/our favor soon.

[jhruth]

Originally Posted by thomasmunka63@hotmail.com

the government is soooooooo full of s--t
like holy f---ing s--t, do they think were that stupid?

i hope they're smart enough to realize that without bikers, all the jobs in that town are done with

....and 3% isn't that much...... i'd pay 13$ for my shuttle run instead of 10$

Uhhh RAINMAN 3% of $10 is only 30c not $3.00 which makes part of this while thing crazy from another end because I'm sure most people would pay $20.60 for a ticket instead of $20.

But the fact that they're making up a program that just pays to run itself. I'd rather pay $25 a ticket and have $5 of it go to Sierra Trail Buttes.

[Stripes]

Originally Posted by yuba man

I wish this was a publicity stunt on the part of YUBA, but things do not look good for the town of Downieville and it’s knobby driven economy. I’ll start with my top 10 facts and opinions and see what it leads to:

[top 10 list of Federal insults]

That’s all I can take for now. There’s a meeting in the morning with the Sierra County Economic Development Board in Sierraville. The focus for myself, YUBA, and the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship, will be to develop a strategy that creates local jobs, protects our natural and economic resources, enhances our community and strengthens our economy.

I’ll keep you posted if there’s additional interest on the thread.

Meanwhile the NEW North Yuba trail is looking sweet. Join the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship on April 12th for a volunteer work day and help build Downieville's only non-motorized singletrack

Thanks for your hard work. I hope to make it to Downieville this year, although it'll most likely be next year.

So, the way I get it, the Democrats take money from Sierra Club and want us kicked out, but Republicans want to tax us to for land usage we pay for ANYWAY?!?

I hate politicans. I plan on writing some angry letters to mine, no matter which political party they assign to themselves. They all suck.

I'm also contacting IMBA about this. This is insulting. We really need a real lobby in DC to get the trails we should be able to enjoy as everyone else does. While IMBA is good at what they do, we need someone who can really take control of these issues. This is ridiculous.

[Cog Wild]

Yes, Cog Wild does pay the 3%. And we are ok with it. Here is why:

To use Forest Service land for any commercial use you need a permit. This includes leading tours and running shuttles to Forest Service land. Without this permit anyone could roll up and start offering tours - even if the "company" does not know the trail system or be ready to deal with flat tires or broken collarbones. It also means that those who hold the permit are the only ones who can offer tours or run shuttles, so it ensures only a certain number of users in each area.

3% is a small fee, a fee that is only taken from tour or shuttle profits, not t-shirt and bumper stickers. It is a small price to pay to ensure we are the only local company and that there are only a few other companies offering tours in the area. Without it, Cog Wild could not exist because we can not compete with the larger companies that offer tours across the US and world.

In addition, we need to show proof of insurance and our plan for the season, so for those who come on tour with us, there is a safety net that we are insured and familiar with the services we offer.

[smw]

No business owner likes new fee's/expenses. But lets face it, thats just how it is. Im self employed myself. Just a cost of doing business. Pass on the expense, its what ya have to do. To be honest I would pay more for your shuttle services.Its a great convienance for me as a rider to enjoy my vacation/get away ride. I mean I dont do it all the time, so its worth it to me. The cost of gas, insurance, employees, it all goes up. I think it is just californian nature to complain when change happens. We complain about higher taxes, and in the next breath complain about school programs going away, or teachers geting laid off. The county I work in makes up permits to generate more money, I dont like it, but I have to pay it or close shop.

Some of you buy $7000 mt bikes, so what if its cost $5 more to ride it. Would you then not have bought the bike?

Oh, and the price of Hopps for beer has gone up too, so be prepared to pay more to drink.

[grrrah]

Originally Posted by smw

No business owner likes new fee's/expenses. But lets face it, thats just how it is. Im self employed myself. Just a cost of doing business. Pass on the expense, its what ya have to do. To be honest I would pay more for your shuttle services.Its a great convienance for me as a rider to enjoy my vacation/get away ride. I mean I dont do it all the time, so its worth it to me. The cost of gas, insurance, employees, it all goes up. I think it is just californian nature to complain when change happens. We complain about higher taxes, and in the next breath complain about school programs going away, or teachers geting laid off. The county I work in makes up permits to generate more money, I dont like it, but I have to pay it or close shop.

Some of you buy $7000 mt bikes, so what if its cost $5 more to ride it. Would you then not have bought the bike?

Oh, and the price of Hopps for beer has gone up too, so be prepared to pay more to drink.

People aren't griping about the extra $0.60, they are complaining that not one cent of it goes toward the trails, and they want controls such as metering how many people get a ride up the hill. Personally I hope they can simply just pass the fee on to us and continue business as usual, but it sounds like the FS also wants to control the businesses.

Now the regarding the price of hopps, I say we organize a coup!

[bullit71]

I too don't mind paying extra $$$....I love Dville! Do whatcha gotta do but don't let this happen!

[budgie]

#7 of YubaMan's post (very helpful, BTW) makes it clear that the FS may limit the number of riders that may be shuttled, limit the dates of operation, etc. This could have several effects, all of which would suck:
1) A shorter season
2) More crowded shuttles, difficulty of getting reservations on weekends, etc.
3) I suppose even putting DO or YE out of business if they can't do enough volume b/c of these limits.
Sounds way more serious than it did at first! I agree that passing on the costs is a necessary step, but even that may not be enough.

[kcavtca]

Money aside, I do worry about this "conflict" they speak of. Motorized vehicles are allowed on Dville, and I see them and make sure I share, but I wonder if some local motor users up there feel encroached upon and want to limit the bikers. If that indeed in happening I take issue with that because of Dvilles unique configuration with gravity that makes it so good for bikes. The volunteerism should be a consideration because it seems to me that its a bit unique in how much they've invested in the network. Anyone that has seen a badly eroded trail knows that a ton of work has gone into Dville to keep it healthy like it is.
The 3% to me isn't the main factor. The gas costs of their operation is a big chunck, and no doubtably went up a lot from last year I think they have the trust of their customer community and we're happy to accept it passed on if the FS implements this, which they're doing.
Last thing anyone wants is the loss of YE or Dville because I might just freak the f out, and from what I'm told its not pleasant to witness.


-kCAVT

[MtnBikerDan]

Originally Posted by Cog Wild

3% is a small fee, a fee that is only taken from tour or shuttle profits, not t-shirt and bumper stickers.

solution: cut the shuttle price to break even / Zero profit - charge only enough to cover Fuel and Insurance and everyone encouraged to buy a T-shirt, or socks or stickers to get on the shuttles or some tactic in that theme.

or how about a Members Only shuttle - $25 membership to the SBTS / Downieville MTB Club, get a laminated card / shuttle pass. There's still the fee for fuel / insurance - but it's at the break even point, no profit derived from the transport of members.

Loosely modeled after the Surf Clubs in Australia. I'm a Member of the Noosa surf club.

If YE runs shuttles as a Greener alternative to private car shuttling as a not for profit service I'd like to see what the FS does about that.

Leave a big tip jar out Yuba Man.

[Jefe74]

Freakin' piggies that the trough. Someone starts an income stream, and the gov't can't wait to push in to take a slice beyond the sales tax, income tax, property tax, gas tax, and corp tax we are already paying.

You know not a penny will really go back to the trails. They will do "studies" which justifies hiring more FS employees which justifies the local manager getting a promotion. And now the guys at YE and DO will have to kiss the managers ass for fear of losing their permit to drive up a road we all already paid for.

And don't kid yourself that it will only add $0.60 to a shuttle. That is if the FS does not limit their hours or numbers. If they have to allocate their overhead expenses over a smaller number of runs, then the price goes up much more. There is a market there, so the companies won't just bow out, but it could have a much bigger impact on shuttle prices.

[MtotheF]

having worked with yuba man at the beginning of the SBTS and dealt with the USFS bureaucratic road block known as joe t chavez in person, there are a few other sticky points that i want to add to this:

- there IS a moto population that uses the area. none of them live there, and most come from nevada city or truckee or the bay area. some of the moto guys are pretty cool, and we would regularly see them logging out deadfall and cleaning trails at the beginning of the season.

- some of them, however, are total choads, who think manifest destiny is still a workable political and land-use way of thinking. in addition, there are some moto users there who say "we were here first, and we built these trails", which is total BS. of that last group, there is even a rider who advertises and then runs riding skills clinics on trails up there, engaging in what is clearly a commercial activity. not only does he do this regularly, without permits, but the USFS professes to have no knowledge of this whatsoever. the damage that this one individual and two of his classes held a few years ago did to chimney rock trail was staggering (bear in mind that i ride dirt bikes too, and know the difference between conscientious use of throttle and using the throttle as a trenching tool).

- the same USFS personnel mentioned up at the top of this, on the day that Sunrise trail was completed, rode their motorcycles UP the trail in what they said was their "review" of the work. the trail ran across private land, and had been built entirely by SBTS volunteers, and, at the request of the landowner, was specifically designated non-motorized use only. USFS knew this, and chose to ride their motorcycles up it anyway, on opening day no less. makes you think there might be some favoritism at work.

- this same USFS employee has also voiced his opinion that speed limits should be enforced on trails up there, but only with regard to bicycles because they can, in his words "get going over 40 miles an hour in places." when it was pointed out to him that even the fastest race times for the downhill race still show an average speed of around 20mph, and that most riders would have a top to bottom average speed of less than 15mph, he just shrugged and said that cyclists were still going too fast and that he'd had motorcycle riders complaining about the approach speed of cyclists.

fee supported use of USFS land is nothing new. the FS is more tapped out and hamstrung by lack of budget than any other federal department at the moment. however, in this instance, it is very much a case of opportunist behavior as well as political favoritism on the part of one branch of the USFS. across the hill in the plumas forest, where the budget scenario isn't really any better (lakes basin side of things), the forest service rep is far more approachable and proactive about bikes and trails, and is much more encouraging of the SBTS volunteer projects.

there is a definite political agenda at work here, and it is based entirely around maintaining a source of revenue that will be spent 100 percent on red tape and "monitoring" and "policing". it is self serving, and it is ********. the community, which already has a longstanding (and now understandable) beef against the USFS, is going to suffer, along with the businesses that are surviving because of mountain biking up there.

and if those businesses go away, there will be NO trail maintenance in the area, NO control over traffic and parking of self-shuttlers, who will increase in number dramatically, and NO services in the area catering to riders with regard to bikes or food or anything.

ah well. it was fun while it lasted.

[zorg]

Is there somebody we can contact at the USFS to voice (politely) our complaints?

[rensho]

Funny that the complaints are coming from the moto guys about mtbers going too fast. I think the problem clearly is the moto guys like to also go UP the trails. I saw a group last year at the bottom bridge before 2nd/3rd junction. That group of 7 motos were heading up. No issues as well all were stopped and got out of there way. I imagine they ran across mtb'ers all day if they were going reverse direction.

As a moto yz250f rider, I could do some pretty good trail damage roosting up a tech section or driving hard out of a corner. It'd take me at least months of mtb'ing to do that type of damage. Oh, and with 12.6" of travel front and rear, it goes a hell of a lot faster than 40mph.


Maybe we mtb'er should ask the FS to charge hikers as they're often getting in our way.

[MtotheF]

Originally Posted by rensho

Funny that the complaints are coming from the moto guys about mtbers going too fast. I think the problem clearly is the moto guys like to also go UP the trails. I saw a group last year at the bottom bridge before 2nd/3rd junction. That group of 7 motos were heading up. No issues as well all were stopped and got out of there way. I imagine they ran across mtb'ers all day if they were going reverse direction.)

it's not "reverse direction" to the moto guys or anybody. the nature of shuttle business has created a defacto downhill flow, but those are all MULTI-USE, and MULTI-DIRECTIONAL trails. because most people are going one direction doesn't automatically turn the trail into a one way trail. i lost count of the times when i was living there that i'd be climbing up to the high country and some goon coming down would be screaming at me to get out of the way because "this is a downhill trail, duuuuuuuude!!!" as he flailed on by.

the trail network up there is unique in that it is open to many different use groups and not too heavily policed. for the most part, the moto population is pretty well controlled. for the most part, so is the mtb community. proponents of either camp can point blame fingers at the other side.

as for roost factor, that comes down entirely to the hand twisting the throttle. i've ridden up there for years, and can move fast on most of those trails with an engine and leave barely any more mark than if i was on a bicycle. but a lot of other people choose to ride with a lot more roost, even if they are going slower... and that becomes a problem.

either way, the politics of this are what stinks. the mtb community using those trails is a gigantic one, with probably hundreds of bicycles to every dirt bike on those trails. and that right there is why the USFS is singling them out. they make a big dollar sign shaped target.

[rensho]

Fully agree with ya MTF.

Of course the trails don't have a direction to them. The reality is 99% of the traffic goes in one direction. Reality. Sucks for the motos though.

[MtnBikerDan]

If the FS thinks we're gonna bend over the barrel and take it up the culo - maybe we should get the MTB community to fire a shot across their bow.

Media involvement? M to the F you got juice in the community - how about a little help?


http://www.congress.org/congressorg/....gov/doolittle
this guy represents the 4th District, where D-ville is.

http://boxer.senate.gov/contact

http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/i...tactUs.EmailMe


U.S. Forest Service Chief Abigail Kimbell has appointed this guy Randy Moore as the California region rep.

Randy Moore has been selected to lead the Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5), headquartered in Vallejo, Calif. Randy has been the Regional Forester in the Eastern Region (Region 9) since May, 2002. Prior to that, he was the Forest Supervisor on the Mark Twain National Forest.

http://www.fs.fed.us/

I've spent a few nights up at chimney rock manning an Adventure race check point, and have seen first hand the negative moto riders churning through the diamond brick etc....

Facking gits with no sense of how to maintain traction.

I've also seen the soul moto riders making their way with respect - have passed moto guys and let moto guys pass going uphill no worries. Oh the times I wished for a Moto when goin up being mummified by Sol.

I've ridden the 2nd/ 3rd UP to packer Saddle in ARs.

These trails could be argued as legacy Heritage trails due to the mining history of the region.

Write the Gov - take action.

expound the Green aspect of the trail users - the Health aspect. In a nation of fat people, getting them out recreating getting healthy, reducing the burden on the healtcare system.

Don't let this FS guy think we're dumb beer swillin real tree wearing KFC slurping gits like the majority of HIS peer group.

We're a bunch of Beer swillin, tech fabric wearing, health conscious, educated humans with a passion for the outdoors, with a vested interest in Stewardship to provide future generations with the same recreational opportunities.

Stand and Fight for your right to enjoy the Forests fairly and freely.

DA

[memine]

I find the attacks on Joe Chavez (USFS officer) on this thread pretty ridiculous. As someone who has built trails with Joe on the Tahoe National Forest for many years, I know first hand about his character and his integrity. Joe:

- Regularly takes out downed trees on Bullards Bars
- Organizes trail work days on multiple use trails Tahoe National Forest
- Works with volunteers on trails all over the Tahoe National Forest
- Creates new trails requested by mountain bikers
- Solicits input from trail users including mountain bikers
- Helps build new trails on the South Yuba, Forest City and Grouse Ridge and other areas

So the story hear is a bit more complex than you what some might claim on this thread. Joe Chavez has done A LOT for mountain bikers. Claiming that he is just government overhead is as about as far from the truth as you can get. Certain (not all) people on this thread like to claim to be victims and distort the truth for their own personal gains.

[bigboulder]

took you long enough to show up at the scene of this train wreck!

[NoBalance]

Originally Posted by memine

I find the attacks on Joe Chavez (USFS officer) on this thread pretty ridiculous. As someone who has built trails with Joe on the Tahoe National Forest for many years, I know first hand about his character and his integrity.

No amount of past acts or glowing integrity will reduce or justify the current planned damage and useless bureaucracy being crafted. Joe could not have possibly contemplated that there would be NO attacks from the mountain biking community on him due to his association with these taxes.

I honeslty don't see how your remarks are remotely associated with this current topic.

[memine]

There is a lot of spin and downright dishonesty on this thread about Joe and the situation at hand. Our fear is being played to. Some of it involves baseless accusations against a man of integrity. These accusations are motivated by profit, not the betterment of trails. I've seen these exact tactics before by the same people.

If you want to learn a bit more about what is *actually* happening, why not call the USFS and talk to Joe? Or his manager? Joe is very approachable and knows a lot about trail design and trail usage. This way, you won't have to rely on spin, innuendo and misinformation posted anonymously on an Internet bulletin board by someone who has an agenda that is quite distinct from trail advocacy.

[renderedtoast]

Somebody post up Joe's number then, I'll be happy to call him. Cause reading what came out of that meeting, some serious BS is going on and it appears that Joe is part of it. I'd definetly like to get his side of it. Or his bosses side of it.

[MtnBikerDan]

Originally Posted by renderedtoast

Somebody post up Joe's number then, I'll be happy to call him. Cause reading what came out of that meeting, some serious BS is going on and it appears that Joe is part of it. I'd definetly like to get his side of it. Or his bosses side of it.

Here you go....
Joe Chavez
Phone 530-478-6158
Fax 530-478-6209
Title Public Service Officer
Staff USDA Forest Service
Office Region 5, Tahoe National Forest, Yuba River Ranger District


and his Boss Randy Moore.

Randy Moore
Phone 707-562-9000
Fax 707-562-9091
Title Regional Forester
Staff R5 RO RF Office
Office Region 5, Regional Office, Office of the Regional Forester





now pass the nitro my Atheroma is spasming.

[MtnBikerDan]

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/mountainbikes/ - scope / context of mtn bikes in the FS system

Heres the RFA for Tahoe Nat Forest - where Dville is.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/rsfmp/...pt_05_yrrd.pdf

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/rsfmp/...ept_05_pow.pdf - upon brief perusal there is no mention of mtn bikes as a user group, nor the the degree of work hours put in by SBTS. Overlooked or deliberately Ignored?

But THEY HAVE singled out what I presume is Packer Saddle as the "Downieville Mtn Biker and hiker trailhead" - Shenanigans!!!!!! As Far as I Know - the current drop off point is on a maintained road, and riders decide which FS OHV multi use trail to enjoy.

The coding legend - points to a trailhead use fee - only thing is there is per se NO trail head facility that I recall. the other code suggest a change of operator - ummm is there a concessionaire in operation? A bus ride to the top of a hill a concessionaire? Sounds more like a GREEN ECOLOGICALLY viable service to the community to me. Reducing the overhead and maintenance load on the FS. Less pollution, congestion, impact.....

YE does not provide a GUIDE SERVICE on FS lands. You get a ride to the top, get dropped off and your on your own.

If the Forest service wants a fee - Administer it, I pay my $50 sno park permit yearly so I can go Backcountry skiing.

Bring it!!!! I'll pay. Don't pinch the little guy trying to make a living.

Ok guys - the Project Leader for the Forest Service RFA program is here :

Project Leader: Bonnie Petitt, 530-478-6207.
Email comments to: tnf_rfa@fs.fed.us


I hear the train a comin.....Its rolling round the bend.....

[renderedtoast]

Dan,

Neither of those links are valid. I'd like to call Joe today if possible.

[MtnBikerDan]

post edited - url removed - clear text pasted instead.

[MtotheF]

Originally Posted by memine

There is a lot of spin and downright dishonesty on this thread about Joe and the situation at hand. Our fear is being played to. Some of it involves baseless accusations against a man of integrity. These accusations are motivated by profit, not the betterment of trails. I've seen these exact tactics before by the same people.

If you want to learn a bit more about what is *actually* happening, why not call the USFS and talk to Joe? Or his manager? Joe is very approachable and knows a lot about trail design and trail usage. This way, you won't have to rely on spin, innuendo and misinformation posted anonymously on an Internet bulletin board by someone who has an agenda that is quite distinct from trail advocacy.

i'll consider myself one of the people you perceive to be "accusing a man of integrity". i've got no personal dog in this fight, since i don't live in downieville anymore. and aside from wrenching as a mechanic at yuba, i've never had a business stake in this. however, one of the very reasons the SBTS was founded was because joe chavez informed us one winter that he did not have the resources of manpower, nor a qualified sawyer on staff, to remove all the deadfall on the divides that year. so we bought a chainsaw and started a nonprofit.

if there was any profit based motivations in the founding of the SBTS, it was based around a desire to keep trails open, to improve the quality of those trails, to reduce and mitigate what we saw as a coming dogfight regarding watershed purity, and to make it so that mountain bikers would be seen as a positive aspect of the local trail community. and yes, that was done in the hopes that the businesses relying on mountain bikes in that community would continue to exist and be profitable.

sorry, but my experiences have not been as proactive or as positive as yours have. i will leave it at that.

[yuba man]

before the calls and complaints to the FS begin, here are some things to consider:

For those of you that want to make a difference and want to ensure long-term mountain bike access on the Downieville Trail System, join the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship for a Trail Daze volunteer work day, or if you can't make a trail work day, become a member of the Stewardship, http://www.sierratrails.org. SBTS Trail Daze events; April 12, May 17-18, June 7, September13-14, October 11, November 8 and December 13.

Just calling the Feds to complain will only piss them off. the message from the mtb community needs to be well thought out and organized- addressing the issues and providing thoughtful and sustainable solutions.

The Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship, Sierra County and IMBA are meeting next week to formulate a game plan for enhancing non-motorized recreational opportunities in the Downieville area.

Mountain bike use needs to be part of the trail use plan on the Downieville Trail System. Currently all FS efforts are being put towards the identification and expansion of OHV routes. The proposed expansion is onto historic gold rush era trails, some of which have running grades of 55% and are located within 100' of a watershed. A big No-No if you are constructing new trails. Keep in mind this expansion is happening without any long-term maintenance, restoration or Trail Adoption programs, and in a current "Roadless" area and a proposed "Wilderness" area.

The drop-off point above Packer Saddle is on private land. This is the same land owner that allowed Yuba Expeditions and the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship to construct the Sunrise Trail. Both YUBA and SBTS have written permission to access this property and have listed the land owner as additional insured.

YUBA does not have a problem with passing the 3% tax onto the customer, we do have a problem with how that 3% gets spent. Our main concern (and perhaps living in this deep river canyon has made us a bit paranoid) is that once under permit, the FS could start limiting the number of clients and trips YUBA can make in a season. The FS could also limit the number of trips to a particular drop-off location. This is also fine with YUBA if the FS would allow for new trail opportunities that provide access to the current system and spread users off of high-use trails. Bottom line is that if the shuttle companies cannot run because of limits placed by the FS it will lead to more cars on the road and more cars parked at the Packer Saddle trailhead. Over use of the Packer Saddle parking area could cause the landowner to deny public access.

The SBTS Trail Crew and volunteers are still working hard to complete the new North Yuba Trail connecting Downieville to Goodyears Bar. This will provide a 15 mile riverfront singletrack along the beautiful north fork of the Yuba River.

[Pantalones]

Without Yuba and the SBTS it wouldn't be possible to run the Downhill or any of the other trails up there-- period.

For those of you who have walked the trails "pre season" you know that in one or two years without active work the trails would just cease to exist (or at least all the fallen dead would make them impassable by anything with wheels).

Do you think the Forest Service does one hour of work on the trails? It hard to work on trails when your sitting at a desk in Sacramento thinking of ways to milk the tax payers and conjuring up new ways to charge the people of California for something we ALREADY OWN>

If Yuba didn't shuttle people up 8 at a time that would be 4 extra cars per van parked at the top and 4 additional trips up to the top to pick up the parked car. Way to go Forest Service!

I can see the FS charging the other shoddy shuttle operations that swoop in like vultures every summer just to make a buck but they should really lay off Yuba if they want the town to survive.

As those who have been there know people of Downieville are very "pro mountain biker". This decision (to limit shuttles) would drive the only outfit in town that cares about the trails out of town and the other shuttle operations would shuttle for a couple of seasons without maintaining anything until the whole scene died a slow death and then all of us will one day tell our children about "back in the day" when we were able to ride our bikes in the wilderness and not just on the closed ski slopes.

Support the people that keep the trails running ....

[renderedtoast]

Originally Posted by MtnBikerDan

Here you go....
Joe Chavez
Phone 530-478-6158
Fax 530-478-6209
Title Public Service Officer
Staff USDA Forest Service
Office Region 5, Tahoe National Forest, Yuba River Ranger District


and his Boss Randy Moore.

Randy Moore
Phone 707-562-9000
Fax 707-562-9091
Title Regional Forester
Staff R5 RO RF Office
Office Region 5, Regional Office, Office of the Regional Forester





now pass the nitro my Atheroma is spasming.

I didn't get a chance to call him today, but I will call him on Monday. And i've always got the nitro on me. I'll share. And when I call him, I'm not going to come at him in a negative manner, I just want to hear his side of it, and get a feel for exactly what the FS position is. If people start calling him and going off, then its just gonna make it that much worse. Plus, I ride Bullards all the time, and if its true that the guy is putting in hours on those trails, then I don't want to discourage him or the FS from working on them.

[burpp]

Hey Renderedtoast !! Before You Blow It For Everybody Who Loves D'ville, Do Us A Favor And Don't Call No One At The F.s. Let Yuba Guys Deal With It. "you" Are Just Going To Piss Everbody Off!! Mtn Bikers And D'ville.

[renderedtoast]

Originally Posted by burpp

Hey Renderedtoast !! Before You Blow It For Everybody Who Loves D'ville, Do Us A Favor And Don't Call No One At The F.s. Let Yuba Guys Deal With It. "you" Are Just Going To Piss Everbody Off!! Mtn Bikers And D'ville.

Learn to use proper grammar and people might actually listen to what you have to say. Considering I've been a government employee for 22 years, I think I can hold an intelligent conversation with another government employee. So I'm going to ignore your advice, thanks.

[burpp]

Renderedtoast, Sorry for my grammar and my typing. I spend more time on my bike than on the internet. But think of all the mtn bikers and Yuba Expeditions request and don't call and make things worse for Yuba.

[renderedtoast]

Originally Posted by burpp

Renderedtoast, Sorry for my grammar and my typing. I spend more time on my bike than on the internet. But think of all the mtn bikers and Yuba Expeditions request and don't call and make things worse for Yuba.

I think that things are already worse for YE since they have it posted on their website. Calling the Forest Service and getting clarification on exactly what the surcharge is that I'm going to end up paying is my right as a tax payer and as a frequent user of the Downieville area.

I'm not sure how often you are there, but I have friends that have a vacation home in Sierra City and I'm there two or three times a week during the spring, summer and fall. I race the Downieville classic, I purchased my Bullit from YE and Flick does alot of my bike tuning. And i've put time in with Stewardship on trail building in that area and donated money to them.

If you had read my earlier post, I said that it wasn't about blasting on him. I for one can tell you that approach doesn't work. But I will say that sitting on the sidelines and not doing or saying anything is a surefire way to lose that area to bureaucratic nonsense. Believe that.

[burpp]

Renderedtoast, not to get into a pissing match, but i'm also up in d'ville 3 weeks of the month from may-mid nov. and every calssic ,and at every trail daze Yuba has.Where we you on the last work day ?? since you say you help out the stewardship, introduce yourself at the next trail daze april 9 and help out on the n. yuba trial connector.See you up there and bring some new workers.

[memine]

What follows are pictures of the nefarious Joe Chavez doing terrible things like trail work, removing downed trees, organizing trail days, spearheading new trail projects. He is just an administrative monster, I tell you:

Joe taking out trees at Bullard's bar :
http://picasaweb.google.com/velojohn...63038982854642

Joe building a new trail at Burlington Ridge:
http://www.goldcountrytrailscouncil.org/IMAGE2_copy.gif

Joe working at Bullard's Bar:
http://bonc.org/images/bullards/4.jpg

[burpp]

Renderedtoast, sorry trail daze date is April 12, 2008

[yuba man]

for all lovers of Downieville singletrack- work still continues on the North Yuba Trail, connecting Downieville to Goodyears Bar. The SBTS crew and several volunteers built new trail tread to the City of Six Creek today. on monday we'll try to get the motorized wheelbarrow, pionjar and boulder buster across the creek, safely. the warm weather has caused the creek to rise significantly. we'd hoped to get the equipment across the creek today but got held up exploding a 3,000 pound boulder out of the way. by the time we were done it was late in the day and the creek was waaaay up.

See you on April 12th, we'll bring the food and the BEER!

[renderedtoast]

Originally Posted by burpp

Renderedtoast, not to get into a pissing match, but i'm also up in d'ville 3 weeks of the month from may-mid nov. and every calssic ,and at every trail daze Yuba has.Where we you on the last work day ?? since you say you help out the stewardship, introduce yourself at the next trail daze april 9 and help out on the n. yuba trial connector.See you up there and bring some new workers.

Burpp, that's outstanding that you are a frequent user and supporter of the area. The more of us that let the FS know our concerns, the better. If its just YE hollering, the FS is going to think its purely a business deal, and ignore them. Nothing gets the attention of a government office quicker than when Joe Public comes a calling. And the next time I do work with the stewerdship, I'll wear a big sign that says "Toast." I may come out on the 12th. I'm curious on where that trail is so helping work on it would kill two birds with one stone.

[memine]

But wait... I thought Joe Chavez was a autocratic bully who had no time for trail work or working with trail volunteers? Or is he so busy with trail work (see picture) that he has no time for administrative tasks? So... which is it?

I have no experience in character assassination, but I would think you would need to keep the story straight and not contradict yourself so many times. It sort of makes the whole victim thing look kind of ridiculous.

[NoBalance]

Lets get off the whole "character" thing. Everyone has a good and a bad side.

It comes down to: What have you done for me lately? Building trails is nice, but if nobody is going to be around to shuttle the poeple to the trailhead, whats the point? Face it, Chavez is doing his job. He has no choice. I don't blame him.

It really doesn't matter WHO it is filling the role. The fact is that the govt is trying to make money from taxes and the more they can make in this particular region, the better Chavez looks. Welcome to America.

[soothsayer]

i apologize if this question has been brought up already... so this will only affect Yuba? What about D'ville Outfitters?

[memine]

X-post from http://gctrails.blogspot.com/

There is some controversy as to Downieville shuttle usage and new USFS fees. Joe Chavez of the Tahoe National Forest wrote me this morning and had this to say:

"Certainly the discussion is distorted. The reality is that in 2004 the Forest Service, nation wide, has changed its regulations to close the loophole that commercial businesses used to run shuttles and guiding when they only used Forest Service roads or trails, without having to be under permit. Now these commercial operations, like all other commercial operations using National Forest Lands, are also required to be under permit. We are not curtailing their business, in fact I have asked each shop to give me their past numbers over the last six years to set the capacity of shuttles to Pack Saddle at a level that reflects their highest use year's numbers. They would be required to pay a fee of 3% of their gross ($0.45 added to a shuttle fee of $15, or $1.80 added to a bike rental of $60) for the permit. This is part of the national policy that all commercial users benefiting from use of the National Forest must pay a fee.

There is nothing personal about putting the two shops under permit, it is our national policy. Based on user conflicts and trail impacts, the Forest Service would have the option to restrict their use numbers, but we are not proposing this because we do understand the importance of this economic engine to Downieville. The Forest Service also requires being additionally insured to protect the public's liability. Other areas, like the Forest Service in Moab, implemented the permit requirement back in 2004.

Appreciate any objectivity and reality you can shed on the issue with the community, thanks. Joe"

[NoBalance]

Hm, doesn't sound that bad. Now lets close this stupid thread and move on.

[MtotheF]

Originally Posted by memine

X-post from http://gctrails.blogspot.com/

There is some controversy as to Downieville shuttle usage and new USFS fees. Joe Chavez of the Tahoe National Forest wrote me this morning and had this to say:

"They would be required to pay a fee of 3% of their gross ($0.45 added to a shuttle fee of $15, or $1.80 added to a bike rental of $60) for the permit. This is part of the national policy that all commercial users benefiting from use of the National Forest must pay a fee.

There is nothing personal about putting the two shops under permit, it is our national policy. Based on user conflicts and trail impacts, the Forest Service would have the option to restrict their use numbers..."

if a bike is rented in downieville, then ridden in the lakes basin, or on mount hough, both of which are in the plumas national forest, does it still make sense for this specific branch of the tahoe national forest to be reaping the "tax" for that bike's rental?

i know, straw man argument. well, what if the bike is rented from someone in downieville then ridden out of state, or at a race somewhere, or in some place OTHER than a national forest? taxing a retail service for its equipment rentals across the board is opportunistic, to say the least. this is done completely at the discretion of the land use manager for that specific forest service district. sorry, but this still smells wrong. the shuttle taxing i can understand. but the potential to restrict the shuttle business, and the intent to tax the bicycle rentals, that just does not seem right.

ahhhh, forget about it. back to character assassinations for me...

[CHUM]

OK....this may sound retarded.....but why not require ALL riders of the D-Ville trails purchase a day/weekend/season permit to ride/enter the forest....it put the responsibility directly on the user and not the business....and it hits everyone using the trails and leaves the businesses out of it....if you get caught w/out permit there's a nasty fine....

i'm thinking like $5......don't they do this in Marin????

[grrrah]

Originally Posted by CHUM

OK....this may sound retarded.....but why not require ALL riders of the D-Ville trails purchase a day/weekend/season permit to ride/enter the forest....it put the responsibility directly on the user and not the business....and it hits everyone using the trails and leaves the businesses out of it....if you get caught w/out permit there's a nasty fine....

i'm thinking like $5......don't they do this in Marin????

Tamarancho (Fairfax) - It's actually private property (owned by the Boy Scouts), and they do a nice job of maintenance. In return you have to sign a waiver and pay the $5 fee.

[Tim Olson]

The day Downieville becomes managed like Marin will be a sad one indeed. I would say it's got the nations worst terrain/access ratio and also the worst user conflicts I've ever heard of. Everybody is forced to be an outlaw or else stick to the tamest stuff out there. The fact that there are signs saying no bikes everywhere gives other users a sense of self righteous authority and another reason to look down their noses at Cyclists and build booby traps or whatever.

It's probably not coming to that any time soon. For me, the beauty of riding in Downieville is getting away from all the regulation and artificial rules of places like the Bay Area.

[CHUM]

Originally Posted by Tim Olson

The day Downieville becomes managed like Marin will be a sad one indeed. I would say it's got the nations worst terrain/access ratio and also the worst user conflicts I've ever heard of. Everybody is forced to be an outlaw or else stick to the tamest stuff out there. The fact that there are signs saying no bikes everywhere gives other users a sense of self righteous authority and another reason to look down their noses at Cyclists and build booby traps or whatever.

It's probably not coming to that any time soon. For me, the beauty of riding in Downieville is getting away from all the regulation and artificial rules of places like the Bay Area.

jeez......spaz down a bit jefe'.......ever pay to park at...let's say....nisene...henry coe???..yah...those places have mega user conflicts ......ever fished??...need a license for that too

take my mentioning of Marin out of it (apparently it's a button for ya....and doesn't really apply).....i was trying to outline an oversimplified direct user-to-FS link that would leave the D-Ville businesses unscathed, uncharged, and outta the bureaucratic loop....stop in at Yuba, D-Outfitters, the local bar.......pick up a day/weekend/season pass....pin it to your pack and you're done...the FS service gets it's revenue, the businesses are left alone....voila'

if rates are going up - why not this way??

[Tim Olson]

I haven't paid to park at Nisene, or Coe, and I don't fish. Actually maybe I paid to park at Coe once. I don't remember. Maybe those parks could use my money better than I could. My point is (yes Marin is a pet peeve of mine) that it's a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy for nothing. I'll pay to maintain the trails, or even buy a green sticker (the signs on some of the OHV routes around Downieville claim they are maintained by green sticker funds), or even better donate to SBTS, but in this case it seems the downturn in the economy is causing fewer tax dollars to arrive at every government agency from public schools to the Forest Service, and everyone is scrambling for ways to keep the cash flow coming in. The proposed program doesn't promise to help the area or the situation much at all. Maybe it's something that will never really affect me. I don't know. Maybe I'm just afraid of having to buy a 'license' to do something that is currently free and unregulated. I think the local businesses probably don't feel the current system is broken either.

[shanedawg]

Originally Posted by smw

I think it is just californian nature to complain when change happens. We complain about higher taxes, and in the next breath complain about school programs going away, or teachers geting laid off.

No smw, that's where you're wrong. We are complaining because they keep taking more and more money from us and doing less and less with it. The state budget is enormous and yet they somehow can't manage to pay teachers and keep the roads pothole free. Where is all the money going? To stupid crap like this new program which will only serve to pay the salaries for more bureaucrats and to wars overseas. That's why people are complaining.

[shanedawg]

Originally Posted by MtnBikerDan

If the FS thinks we're gonna bend over the barrel and take it up the culo - maybe we should get the MTB community to fire a shot across their bow.

Media involvement? M to the F you got juice in the community - how about a little help?


http://www.congress.org/congressorg/....gov/doolittle
this guy represents the 4th District, where D-ville is.

http://boxer.senate.gov/contact

DA

Good lord man, whatever you do don't involve Barbara Boxer, she'll act like she wants to help and then stab you in the back, just like she did over the wilderness bills she was working on.

[smw]

Originally Posted by shanedawg

No smw, that's where you're wrong. We are complaining because they keep taking more and more money from us and doing less and less with it. The state budget is enormous and yet they somehow can't manage to pay teachers and keep the roads pothole free. Where is all the money going? To stupid crap like this new program which will only serve to pay the salaries for more bureaucrats and to wars overseas. That's why people are complaining.

Where? Poorly run govt departments is where. More administrators then teachers.

[shanedawg]

So to get back to the Joe Chavez thing..... I see pictures posted by memine of him doing trailwork with a guy dressed in moto gear. This only seems to back up the assertation that he's biased towards moto riders. Was it supposed to show us that he is fair towards all user groups? Well in my opinion it didn't, and that was the whole point of the previous arguments against him.

And memine, the quote you posted directly from Joe is only going to do one thing.....

IT'S GOING TO FIRE UP MOUNTAIN BIKERS

WHY?

Because every time someone from the government makes some coment like "Based on user conflicts and trail impacts, the Forest Service would have the option to restrict their use numbers" mtn bike access usually takes an unfair beating.

User conflict in the context of the government to me means that some small group of trail users has gotten the ear of a public official and nagged them. It always seems to be some group that is irritated because they can't have exclusive access to enjoy some natural, public resource in the way that they personally think is the "best" way to use it. That goes for hikers, bird watchers, equestrians, motos, etc. As far as the trail impact well that's a no brainer, It's already been shown that the mtn bike community has put in 1000's of hours making the trails better than they ever could have been without the mtn bikes.

If this was just about collecting a small tax for the commercial use of the forest service land I doubt anyone would be upset, but the idea of permit limits and restrictions on use are a total control freak power grab ploy that is completely unneeded as the current situation is working just fine.

I've personally see the many times that various different government agencies have told the mtn bike community one thing to their face and then turned around and passed new rules and policies that stab them in the back so I'm not gonna buy into what Joe tells people on the phone or what he posts in writing. The only thing that holds truth for me is his past actions regarding fair policies toward all user groups. If you have data on that I'm listening.......

[memine]

I posted a picture and links to three pictures. They show Joe Chavez working with a moto user, a local equestrian club and a local mountain bike club. I have lots of other pictures from trailwork days Joe has led with mountain bikers.

Again, I suggest you contact Joe yourself and find out what the USFS is actually planning. There have been so many absurd assertions on this thread that the truth is now obscured in a sea of BS. Calling him would give you a chance to speak your mind too.

Originally Posted by shanedawg

So to get back to the Joe Chavez thing..... I see pictures posted by memine of him doing trailwork with a guy dressed in moto gear. This only seems to back up the assertation that he's biased towards moto riders. Was it supposed to show us that he is fair towards all user groups? Well in my opinion it didn't, and that was the whole point of the previous arguments against him.

[Empty_Beer]

I usually self-shuttle or pedal up. I'm not going to fret about any of this until someone from the Forest Circus is standing up top saying, "Sorry... trail's closed for the remainder of the day. We hit our capacity at 1:15 today. Try again tomorrow."

And if that happens, there are plenty of other ways down...

[renderedtoast]

burpp, I'll expect to see you there tomorrow for the trail work.

[GoGoGordo]

Originally Posted by Empty_Beer

I usually self-shuttle or pedal up. I'm not going to fret about any of this until someone from the Forest Circus is standing up top saying, "Sorry... trail's closed for the remainder of the day. We hit our capacity at 1:15 today. Try again tomorrow."

And if that happens, there are plenty of other ways down...

What he said.
let em (YE) close their doors.
We got to the top before they were open and will get to the top ifin they close.
Besides I ride with DO and Greg says your all makin a big deal out of nuthin.

[renderedtoast]

Well, when the trail that I worked on today is completed, its going to open up a a whole new dynamic in Downieville. You won't need to shuttle. The trailhead starts in Downieville, and while there is a climb on either end, the descent is going to be out of this world. The trail is that sick.


p.s. The FS was out today to help with the build. The first time they have come out to build on a trail up there. It was nice seeing them there. Shows they are interested in what happens up there.

p.s.s. Burrp, were you there?