|
Post by Angela on Oct 28, 2011 21:02:36 GMT -5
The tree has been removed! We did a late afternoon ride on Skinny and Brown Wave then grabbed the chainsaw and headed for our input point. It was already around dusk and was starting to spit so we were on a mission. Daniel made the first two cuts and after I moved the first log sections off the trail I felt a sharp pain in my ankle - I didn't see anything so kept working thinking horsefly or ant ....suddenly two more intense "bites" and then Daniel was complaining - I couldn't see anything but he saw that we had disturbed a yellow jacket nest and they were hot. Kicked the last log off and made a run for it --- we both ended up with about 15 stings. There are still two small pine branches across the trail there, if you stop to move them just remember to do it quickly and move on - we didn't stick around to find out where the nest was! Ornery critters
|
|
|
Post by jtaylor on Oct 29, 2011 20:42:57 GMT -5
I cut the tree on GW about 3 miles in ccw, near the rocky curve/old roadbed, where I used the hedger; whatever- we need to get the mile markers/access points put up....... Glad you guys got the "yellow-jacket log"
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 30, 2011 8:33:44 GMT -5
Well there was some unpleasantness involved for sure - we both felt those surges of pain from the stings on our trip up to Atlanta and interestingly enough by our return trip the surges of pain had turned to surges of intense itching! There was a slightly funny factor - we are obviously not trail runners (usually) but for a few of our friends out there who remember a trip to Brevard and the screechings of pterodactyl girl - we did maintained an element of dignity - I was definitely saying ow and Daniel was saying.... well what he said translated into ow!
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on Oct 30, 2011 13:42:18 GMT -5
There's a tree down on Deep Step, right at the top of the big climb when going CCW.
Please leave it! It's a good rider, in a great spot. No one will ever get to it going fast.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 30, 2011 14:39:45 GMT -5
Just to clarify no one that I know of is just rolling through the forest cutting any and all trees off the trails. The ones that get cut (by one of the certified sawyers) are typically problem trees - at a bad angle, too high off the ground, positioned so that people can easily create a bypass, are causing the trail to significantly widen, etc. If a tree has fallen on the upper portions of Great Wall and Skinny (basically the connector to all the trails - it gets a little more scrutiny because of the heavy traffic and the fact that people will not stay in the center of the log to cross so we end up with a really wide trail). Also try to keep the Skinny mostly clear since it is billed as the "easier" of the trails out there. I personally think it would help to tag the riders with maybe orange trail marking ribbon or some other way (after the trail committee has reached agreement) and then broadcast that so that we don't end up with multiple reports of a tree down that has been designated as a rider. Also there are multiple certified sawyers in the woods and not everyone of them agree on what a rider is or isn't so the marking would also be a visual note to them that it was left intentionally..............maybe a discussion for the next meeting??
|
|
|
Post by mhanna on Oct 30, 2011 18:48:20 GMT -5
Dustin said, "There's a tree down on Deep Step, right at the top of the big climb when going CCW. Please leave it! It's a good rider, in a great spot. No one will ever get to it going fast. " Too late. It's gone. Didn't mention it the other with the one on BW hoping it would be left alone. Someone cut it between Z and I's first and second lap around DS-BR-TWR. One thing is for sure. We've got awesome sawyers out there. They don't play around when there are trees down. Thank you all for you hard work. Would be great if we had some way to leave a few riders though. MH
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Oct 30, 2011 21:06:16 GMT -5
Just to clarify no one that I know of is just rolling through the forest cutting any and all trees off the trails. The ones that get cut (by one of the certified sawyers) are typically problem trees - at a bad angle, too high off the ground, positioned so that people can easily create a bypass, are causing the trail to significantly widen, etc. If a tree has fallen on the upper portions of Great Wall and Skinny (basically the connector to all the trails - it gets a little more scrutiny because of the heavy traffic and the fact that people will not stay in the center of the log to cross so we end up with a really wide trail). Also try to keep the Skinny mostly clear since it is billed as the "easier" of the trails out there. I personally think it would help to tag the riders with maybe orange trail marking ribbon or some other way (after the trail committee has reached agreement) and then broadcast that so that we don't end up with multiple reports of a tree down that has been designated as a rider. Also there are multiple certified sawyers in the woods and not everyone of them agree on what a rider is or isn't so the marking would also be a visual note to them that it was left intentionally..............maybe a discussion for the next meeting?? Well, it is happening none the less. The small tree on Skinny is a perfect example. If going CW on Skinny it was w/n the first 200 yards of trail after you leave the GW (or connector as some think it is). It was in a narrow section of trail that had many standing trees nearby. The trail couldn't have gotten much wider. It has been cut off the trail. This was perfect size log for folks to learn to ride over a log. It had good site lines into it from both sides. How does one learn to ride a log if there are no logs to ride over? If given the choice, I'll take the wider trail and leave the trees to ride over. More diligence should be paid to blocking the ride around until a "stay in the trail" sign can be put there. Instead, the tree was cut off. If this means some non-riders get left...so be it. I don't mind getting off and walking around trees I can't ride. This is a small price to pay to have some trees left on the trails to ride over. I am not one to tell someone they are volunteering "wrong". But in this case, cutting fewer trees would actually be less work, not more. Could I get an email or private message as to who are the certified sawyers in SORBA CSRA? I am sure I know each of them and consider them a friend. I'd like to give them a very polite and respectful request to leave some trees to ride over.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 30, 2011 22:01:43 GMT -5
I get a lot of reports from a lot of different people and also glean stuff from the forum so I can report volunteer efforts in the newsletter. No one has mentioned cutting a tree on Deep Step. What day was it cut? The only people who are allowed (by the USFS) to cut trees on USFS land are chainsaw certified sawyers and they are usually great about reporting their work.
I think we should have the discussion at the next meeting - marking the trees somehow might make the most sense since people would get used to the markings and would know why it was left. I'll ask if it can be added to the agenda.
|
|
|
Post by oddcouple on Oct 30, 2011 22:18:02 GMT -5
Well, it is happening none the less. The small tree on Skinny is a perfect example. If going CW on Skinny it was w/n the first 200 yards of trail after you leave the GW (or connector as some think it is). It was in a narrow section of trail that had many standing trees nearby. The trail couldn't have gotten much wider. It has been cut off the trail. This was perfect size log for folks to learn to ride over a log. It had good site lines into it from both sides. You got to be Fn kidding me.I worked hard to get that tree to lay flat to be the prefect rider even I could get over it and that is not saying much.It was laying over just after the burn and you could just get under it.I pushed it down knocked the limbs off so it would be perfectly flat.I don't know who cuts the good riders off the trails but they have their heads up their A**.You guys go ahead and talk about it next meeting.Like it has been said before you will just be beating a dead horse.Its sad when a good group of people that work hard to keep the trails in prefect shape can't agree year after year on this same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 30, 2011 23:01:28 GMT -5
Actually this is a slightly different lack of agreement than our usual - usually it is that the whole group can't agree on what size tree down across the trail is actually a rider.
This more stems around when is it okay to widen the trail.......so does the end justify the means or not......is it okay to widen the trail as long as someone is learning to ride over a tree or to race still faster (the widening of certain parts of Horn Creek during the recent Baker's Dozen) but not okay if a person is just riding around something they don't want to ride over (roots, rocks, half a tree in the trail)??
I think a system to mark the riders will help (provided all the cutting is done by the certified sawyers and I know that is not always the case).
There doesn't seem to be any shortage of trees coming down across the trail and once you are away from the Bartram trail and the flow trails (FATS) most of our trails have some steller riders for people to hone their skills on so all is not lost. And there are trees across the trails at FATS that have been there a very long time.
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on Oct 31, 2011 5:47:55 GMT -5
Since we can't seem to agree on what is and is not a rider I guess we do need a way to mark the riders. Flagging tape is the obvious method I guess, but that means we have to start riding with some flagging tape.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 31, 2011 6:25:33 GMT -5
I've asked that we put it on the agenda for the next meeting. I'm not sure having a bunch of riders carrying flagging tape will solve the problem but if the flagging tape seems to be the agreed upon solution, two or three people carrying a couple of pieces in their packs are not going to weigh anyone down - I don't think anyone needs a roll in their pack - there generally aren't that many trees that are down that will end up designated as a rider at any given time.
|
|
|
Post by jtaylor on Oct 31, 2011 6:54:15 GMT -5
I cut the tree on DS yesterday. Sorry, bad judgement. I will stick to Modoc from now on, promise.
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Oct 31, 2011 9:57:53 GMT -5
I cut the tree on DS yesterday. Sorry, bad judgement. I will stick to Modoc from now on, promise. No sweat man. Plenty more will fall. Thanks for all you do.
|
|
|
Post by azdrawdy on Oct 31, 2011 10:31:49 GMT -5
I cut the tree on DS yesterday. Sorry, bad judgement. I will stick to Modoc from now on, promise. Yup. After reading some of the comments in this, and previous, threads on the tree subject, I'll do what I have been doing and stick with my "base" trails: Horn, HKSP, BCSP and Bartram. If a tree is a a safety issue and needs to come out NOW (there have been some on FATS, Modoc, TC, etc.) then I'll step in, but other than that... That said, I still find it ironic that it is OK (and encouraged) to leave a downed tree when extremely obvious ride-arounds or widening is occurring. Angela's second para hit the nail on the head. MD
|
|
|
Post by yetichick on Oct 31, 2011 11:15:23 GMT -5
FATS draws a large group of non SORBA/CSRA mountain bikers, and I think we can safely bet that some of them are removing trees, and probably think they are doing the right thing.
Learning how to ride a tree can be done in your own backyard. You can practice on trees of varying diameters, and then use those skills on the trail. We post signs to tell people to stay on the trail. If we get upset because people were riding around the rock/root section on the top of the Skinny, I can't see making an exception for a fallen tree.
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on Oct 31, 2011 11:28:34 GMT -5
It just seems like ALL the trees that come down on FATS get cut off. There's a few that have been there forever, but it seems like everything new that comes down gets cut off. Obviously we don't want to leave all of them, but surely there's some that could be left. I mean, in 37 miles of FATS there's how many trees down that take some skill to get over? Half a dozen? I think a system to mark the ones we want to keep is a good starting point. If the spot evolves too much w/ride arounds and what not, then the tree could get removed, or we could try and choke the trail. But at least give it a chance to see what happens. There's a bunch of folks that ride FATS almost exclusively, and maybe giving them the opportunity to learn how to ride logs will make their occasional trips to other trails more enjoyable, and make them more likely to start riding the other trails more regularly. And I (we) do appreciate all the work the sawers do, you guys do a ton. But wouldn't it be nice to do a little less? Logs are fun!
|
|
|
Post by dsquaredmsquared on Oct 31, 2011 12:06:09 GMT -5
In defense of the log being removed (and we know Jon is an advocate for leaving riders), I am not sure that the option to keep this particular tree as a rider was, excuse the pun, clear-cut. Yes, it was a nice rider and, going ccw, was in a good spot at the end of a climb. However, the log was located on a flat, ~1 or 2 bike lengths from the top of a steep slope on the other side. When traveling cw, I think that more than one rider will dismount at the top and walk the log, which doesn’t leave much room for following riders to stop on the flat. Also, I don’t think that you could see the log until you’re at least half way up the slope, so you are committed to the hill but may have to stop before the top. Maybe this log should have been discussed before being cut but, in this case, I understand and can support the sawyer’s decision.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 31, 2011 12:08:44 GMT -5
We'll figure something out!
Don't forget that most of the trees that fall across the trails at FATS aren't good healthy trees they are old, dead and diseased trees and they often do stay there on the ground (I can think of several over the past few years). They make good riders initially and then they just rot away in a few months. If they degrade to a certain point they generally get kicked off the trail.
Plenty more that come down are just tiny nuisance trees that don't serve any purpose but sometimes people will just ride around them rather than stop and move them.
A lot of the trail is not easily accessible so getting in and cutting trees off is not something taken lightly by most of our sawyers. Generally there is a reason to take one out - that isn't to say everyone will agree with that reason - but it generally has to do with things like trail bypasses being created, bad angles or locations, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Oct 31, 2011 12:11:37 GMT -5
In defense of the log being removed (and we know Jon is an advocate for leaving riders), I am not sure that the option to keep this particular tree as a rider was, excuse the pun, clear-cut. Yes, it was a nice rider and, going ccw, was in a good spot at the end of a climb. However, the log was located on a flat, ~1 or 2 bike lengths from the top of a steep slope on the other side. When traveling cw, I think that more than one rider will dismount at the top and walk the log, which doesn’t leave much room for following riders to stop on the flat. Also, I don’t think that you could see the log until you’re at least half way up the slope, so you are committed to the hill but may have to stop before the top. Maybe this log should have been discussed before being cut but, in this case, I understand and can support the sawyer’s decision. Given your description I suspect most if not all of our sawyers would have made the decision to cut.
|
|