|
Post by seenvic on Oct 31, 2011 12:27:19 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 I thank you and several others for what you do on the trails I really like to ride. I really appreciate it and hope I have pulled my weight out there the last few years. We'd be hurting without y'all. And it would suck if FATS was the only trail to ride because you stopped doing the work you do on the far better (primitive, more challenging) trails further in the forest. Lets face it, Turkey, Wine and Horn Creek would be all but officially closed if not for you and a few others. Probably Modoc and HKSP too. I think we should educate the riders not to ride around these trees. We need a plan for signage. We have the money, I think. It would be well spent. Trail widening....FATS was built with machines. The initial tread was 48" wide on the 4 older loops and ~42 inches wide on Big Rock and Tower. Over time, an 18" ish line forms in the tread, and the edges don't look like a trail tread. But under that layer of pine straw is a trail tread. As long as the line being ridden is within this initial swath, I don't see this as trail widening.....it is simply moving to another sustainable portion of the initial tread that was built. Now in the cases of the armor, a mud hole or erosion was fixed with those bricks/rocks. Due to the weight of the material, it isn't practical to armor the entire initial 48" tread. Riding next to the armor, but within the initial tread will (most likely) result in a new mud hole/erosion next wet season. For this reason, I think the lines around the armor are far more important to shut down. I think it is a mistake to cater to the folks who ride around everything at FATS. SORBA CSRA owes them nothing but education....our reason for being a 501c3 is education. In the locations where Paul installed the "stay on the trail" signs, it has worked. It can work in more of these places. I realize this takes time and effort. I am thinking the tree on Skinny was removed by riders with a handsaw....as Barbara said happens. Again, this could be an educational thing with a sign at the trailhead. Some may read this and say who is this guy? I feel like I can say whatever I want about FATS. My company designed and built it and we got the funding for it. It is sorta like my child. And I can say what I want about my child . I am proud of FATS, but often I feel like the Indian in the littering commercial when I ride there. The old folks like me on here will recall that commercial. The purpose of that commercial was to educate people not to litter. The purpose of SORBA is education......mainly trail and riding education. We should not cater to uneducated riders. We should work to educate them.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Y. on Oct 31, 2011 22:23:42 GMT -5
Dittos Angela, when I first read the description of it being at the top of a rise I wondered if that was really a good spot, and reading D2M2 kind of cemented that for me.
Also, if THAT many riders are getting cut, I suspect someone is helping the sawyers. Those folks are experienced riders, have been doing this a long time, and pretty much have it down on what is good and what could prove dangerous.
I had not ridden in a good while and went out to Skinny a couple of weeks ago. Riding CCW, there used to be a log somewhere about midway through going down a hill. It was a little bigger than I will go over, but most did by the looks of the sawdust from chainrings. I kept thinking it was right around the corner but all of a sudden I was at BW without seeing it. The little one that has been there forever is still just past BW where you cross the firepath or logging rd., but the other was missing. Somebody cut it out?
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Nov 1, 2011 6:39:53 GMT -5
If you are talking about the one in a curve then yes that was probably taken out during the National Public Lands Day work party. Not a difficult tree - perhaps a little awkward due to being in a curve but the biggest issue was the trail was being seriously widened at that point. It appears as if someone attempted to redirect riders to the center of the log by placing a series of about 6 to 7 small rocks along the trail leading up to the log but it really didn't help.
Not a problem for people who get off and walk over because generally you will stop on the trail, lift your bike over and then proceed on down the trail. People riding the log or trying to ride it were simply all over the place.
The location wasn't ideal due to the curve but if we had been able to keep the log riders funneled to the basic center - and skinning the log in the center might have helped and may should be tried the next time - I actually saw that work (although it wasn't done intentionally) up on Big Rock earlier in the year. In that case the log was skinned in a location off the trail proper and it was obvious it drew the riders off to that side as the main trail had actually moved a foot or two to the right (when going ccw).
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Nov 1, 2011 19:13:18 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. If I ride up to a log that I can't ride over and there are riders behind me, I will not stop and block their line.....I leave them a line to ride over the log. This is common sense and a courtesy to these riders. This can done in any number of ways.... You could simply work on your cyclecross move, dismount, while keeping on the move and get over the log while off the bike. This is a good move to have and I practice it whenever I can. It is almost as much fun as riding over the log. It is a good skill to have. You can stop on the near side of the log, while leaving plenty of room for other riders to get around you. Either way you don't have to create a bottleneck at the log for the riders behind you. Sometimes you just have to think of others. Stopping right in front of the log at the best line with other riders behind you is poor form, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Nov 1, 2011 19:54:35 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. I agree with all of this. Especially the part of learning to ride over the logs. We didn't move the rocks/roots on Skinny. We blocked the line around the rocks and put a sign there to stay on the trail. Same should be done for trees. That would be consistency.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Nov 1, 2011 21:09:41 GMT -5
After reading all the posts I'm thinking maybe we have been keeping things a little too pristine and tidy - would be a whole lot less work if we just let the trees fall where they may and just do one work party a year to clear the trees on each trail that no one seems to be riding. It takes a whole lot of time to get to some of these fallen trees, drag all that equipment in, suit up with safety gear and then trying to lug the huge pieces these guys cut off the trail - and I won't even talk about the poison ivy or yellow jackets.......
|
|
|
Post by oddcouple on Nov 1, 2011 22:12:40 GMT -5
After reading all the posts I'm thinking maybe we have been keeping things a little too pristine and tidy - would be a whole lot less work if we just let the trees fall where they may and just do one work party a year to clear the trees on each trail that no one seems to be riding. It takes a whole lot of time to get to some of these fallen trees, drag all that equipment in, suit up with safety gear and then trying to lug the huge pieces these guys cut off the trail - and I won't even talk about the poison ivy or yellow jackets....... I have been preaching this for years and have got laughed at by some people and will still get laughed at, but I don't care.I think that our trails are to well groomed.I have suggested on more than one occasion to have 3 or 4 major work party's and work on the trails that need it most.I don't mind getting off my bike and climbing over and walking around stuff. I also don't mind getting slapped in the face,briar's,and ticks from the foliage next to the trail.I thought thats what mountain biking is about and just a few reasons that I love it.
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Nov 1, 2011 23:26:39 GMT -5
Well no one can say we aren't a passionate group! To be honest with over 150 miles of singletrack I think we have something for just about everyone (don't really have any mountains but don't think that stops any of the fun). If fast, flowing singletrack is your bag we have that and if not we also have plenty of stickers, ticks, face slappers, roots, holes, ruts, logs, yellow jackets ..... I come away thinking about that old saying....you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Y. on Nov 2, 2011 0:09:32 GMT -5
I'm in the "if you can't ride it, walk it" camp. As much as I belittle myself about riding "features", I find that I ride a lot more of them successfully than I used to. I still won't go over logs tall enough to snag the chain ring, it just isn't of interest to do it, so I dismount. That is fine with me, I just don't want to do it every couple of hundred yards.
|
|
jimf
Gear Masher
Posts: 29
|
Post by jimf on Nov 2, 2011 7:48:01 GMT -5
I totally agree with Mark Y. Jumping big logs is of no interest to me but I don't think we should remove every one. I feel that certian trails should be log free, Bartram for instance. But it would not make sence to remove all of them from FATS or Modoc. The more advanced the tail the more obstacles.
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on Nov 2, 2011 7:49:22 GMT -5
I feel that certian trails should be log free, Bartram for instance. But it would not make sence to remove all of them from FATS or Modoc. The more advanced the tail the more obstacles. Agreed. FATS isn't a beginner trail, and some difficult features would only make it better.
|
|
|
Post by azdrawdy on Nov 2, 2011 9:42:04 GMT -5
After reading all the posts I'm thinking maybe we have been keeping things a little too pristine and tidy - would be a whole lot less work if we just let the trees fall where they may and just do one work party a year to clear the trees on each trail that no one seems to be riding. It takes a whole lot of time to get to some of these fallen trees, drag all that equipment in, suit up with safety gear and then trying to lug the huge pieces these guys cut off the trail - and I won't even talk about the poison ivy or yellow jackets....... I have been preaching this for years and have got laughed at by some people and will still get laughed at, but I don't care.I think that our trails are to well groomed.I have suggested on more than one occasion to have 3 or 4 major work party's and work on the trails that need it most.I don't mind getting off my bike and climbing over and walking around stuff. I also don't mind getting slapped in the face,briar's,and ticks from the foliage next to the trail.I thought thats what mountain biking is about and just a few reasons that I love it. Could not disagree more. We are comparing apples to oranges. FATS is FATS (and yes, I know this is a FATS thread), and you all can decide how much to groom it, but if the other trails are not at least maintained, they will not get ridden. YC and I go out and ride the other CSRA trails year-round, and if someone doesn't jump up and down and request work parties, then those trails would get ridden less. When was the last time you have ridden TC, WC, Modoc, HKSP, BCSP, etc. in the past 36 months? Just a question. Quite a few of those used to be go-to trails. Many of our trails need to be cut back to remain sustainable. They require maintenance. I for one do not want be beaten in the face with face-slappers constantly, and have to dismount 32 times for a 10 mile loop, and have to go around 4 tree tops. Just saying'... Go ride other trails outside the CSRA. Believe it or not, but trees are cut out. The trails are the features. Not trees. This entire hang-up about trees is a non-issue. Most trees that are cut out are not riders. Not to any of you. Not even Hans Rey. Want pics? I've got 'em. Put obstacles in your back yard and learn how to ride. Or go to a ride clinic. MD
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Nov 2, 2011 11:41:27 GMT -5
Can I say to readers who don't know us personally, that some of us have been at this a long time....together. We are have a "family type" relationship and can say what we want to one another and have thick skin about it.
To a (wo)man, there is no one in this conversation that I don't consider a friend and that I have a deep admiration and respect for. At least that goes for me.
We don't have to agree on everything, but probably do on agree on more (bike/trail) related issues than we disagree.
I appreciate of the efforts of our sawyers at ALL the trails. I am most appreciative of the work done at the older trails because without these efforts, they would be unrideable.
I think FATS will always get what it needs to be ridden. Folks who do no trail work now but love FATS would step up if they had to. I can't say the same for the older trails. If not for a handful of people, some of which I am in disagreement with in this thread about FATS, are the key to me being able to ride these trails.
It is obvious to any reader that I am over FATS and flow trails in general. To me FATS is like chocolate cake. I like chocolate cake....chocolate cake every day (ride)....not so much.
MD is right about the older trails. Go ride them.
|
|
|
Post by brianW on Nov 2, 2011 16:24:59 GMT -5
to be honest this thread has gone way off topic. I also like BV's family analogy.
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on Nov 3, 2011 11:31:52 GMT -5
I'm in the "if you can't ride it, walk it" camp. As much as I belittle myself about riding "features", I find that I ride a lot more of them successfully than I used to. I still won't go over logs tall enough to snag the chain ring, it just isn't of interest to do it, so I dismount. That is fine with me, I just don't want to do it every couple of hundred yards. Mark, Wondering if this came about from logs on the trails you ride or if you set up something in your backyard to practice. The backyard idea is a good one. Just curious what worked for you. Thanks. I agree on the " I just don't want to do it every couple of hundred yards" statement. I think a happy medium can be found.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Y. on Nov 9, 2011 16:00:54 GMT -5
Bill, it came slowly by just doing it. That little rocky rooty spot on Skinny skinned my behind more than once and tacoed a front wheel, but it was because I was tentative. As my confidence has grown by increments, so has my ability to navigate some things I used to get stopped on. Just pick a spot a go for has worked. The same for the canal trail. There were a couple of spots going ccw that I would stall on (uphill with roots), but when I finally said to hell with it and hit them with speed I rolled right over and kept going. It is mostly in one's head.
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on Nov 9, 2011 16:47:04 GMT -5
The same for the canal trail. There were a couple of spots going ccw that I would stall on (uphill with roots), but when I finally said to hell with it and hit them with speed I rolled right over and kept going. It is mostly in one's head. Speed = momentum I once heard/read that the trick to mountain biking is going fast enough not to fall over. There's some truth to that I think.
|
|
|
Post by brianW on Nov 9, 2011 18:21:55 GMT -5
Speed = momentum I once heard/read that the trick to mountain biking is going fast enough not to fall over. There's some truth to that I think. correction p=m*v ;D you forgot to multiply velocity by mass note: I am assuming speed has a positive direction, hence the "velocity"
|
|
|
Post by mudonthetires on Nov 9, 2011 18:34:16 GMT -5
Oddly enough I have gotten hurt worse falling while going slow than when falling at higher speeds. Probably something to do with adrenaline and my ability to tuck and roll fairly well. Go faster!
|
|
|
Post by Mark Y. on Nov 10, 2011 23:46:01 GMT -5
I've fallen a helluva lot more going slow than I have fast, your brain just keeps telling you that fast will hurt more. So, you have to decide; go slow and fall more, or go fast and fall less. There has to be a happy medium in there somewhere. See, when you are young and full of piss and vinegar, a shinned knee or elbow is a badge of honor. When your are my age it just plain hurts and you find yourself avoiding situations that may wind up causing pain. You young bucks shake off in a day what hurts me for a week.
|
|