Linking up Sycamore and Mission is nice but the focus on equestrian access is obvious. I am worried sycamore will become another PQ with no legal singletrack for MTB use. With the loss of DMM and the tunnels people are hungry for singletrack which will amount to more traffic and the potential for more animosity towards cyclists. However all the trail work has brought some positive attention and the thanks of hikers and equestrians. Lets keep it up! And please everybody get a bell or make your presence known. I have gotten alot of positive response from using my bell to alert people. The last thing we need is an accident or altercation that reflects poorly on us all.
following the PQ/tunnels/DMM problems.
I took a look around at other CAC plans last night.
Particularly, the MTRP CAC "20 year needs assesment"
there is mention of equestrian needs, there is a mention of rock climbing needs, a slight mention of trail needs but as far as specific "mountain bike" or "cycling" needs. None, zero, zip
MTRP TWENTY YEAR NEEDS LIST U
PDATED FROM SEPTEMBER 2005
Priority Project
1 Old Mission Dam Maintenance Project
1 Land acquisition for park expansion - West Sycamore, East Elliott and Stowe Trail which will link Goodan Ranch and
Sycamore Canyon Preserves to Mission Trails Regional Park.
1 Equestrian staging area - Phase II
1 Kumayaay Lake berm restoration and dredging
1 Park entry sign - West Sycamore Region
1 Trail improvements to Oak Grove Loop trail
1 Construct a suspension or truss pedestrian bridge across the San Diego River on the San Diego River Crossing trail
1 Initiate the process, fund and complete the Master Plan and Natural Resource Management Plan for the East Elliott area of MTRP
2 Park entry sign - Entrance at the east end of Father Junipero Serra Trail and Mission Gorge Road
2 Trail system with parking areas
2 Visitor & Interpretive Center enhancements
2 Enhancement of planting (includes design and irrigation system) on San Carlos point at Lake Murray
2 Identify areas in the Park that might be available for additional rock climbing activities and identify funding for appropriate
studies to facilitate CEQA compliance
2 Provide facilities for family and group picnicking near the Big Rock park trailhead in the City of Santee
2 Build a new, more accessible, maintainable and environmentally sensitive trail from the existing Cowles Mountain Staging Area to the summit
3 Restroom at Old Mission Dam
3 Create a small off-street parking area at the Barker Way entrance to the Barker Way trail
3 Expand parking on the easterly side of Father Junipero Sera trail between Mission Gorge Road and the Visitor and Interpretive Center driveway entrance
Also, a PDF of the land acquisition and trail names and areas connecting to Sycamore. Or, shall we say, lack of trails...
http://www.mtrp.org/cac.asp?idno=179721
Particularly, the MTRP CAC "20 year needs assesment"
there is mention of equestrian needs, there is a mention of rock climbing needs, a slight mention of trail needs but as far as specific "mountain bike" or "cycling" needs. None, zero, zip
MTRP TWENTY YEAR NEEDS LIST U
PDATED FROM SEPTEMBER 2005
Priority Project
1 Old Mission Dam Maintenance Project
1 Land acquisition for park expansion - West Sycamore, East Elliott and Stowe Trail which will link Goodan Ranch and
Sycamore Canyon Preserves to Mission Trails Regional Park.
1 Equestrian staging area - Phase II
1 Kumayaay Lake berm restoration and dredging
1 Park entry sign - West Sycamore Region
1 Trail improvements to Oak Grove Loop trail
1 Construct a suspension or truss pedestrian bridge across the San Diego River on the San Diego River Crossing trail
1 Initiate the process, fund and complete the Master Plan and Natural Resource Management Plan for the East Elliott area of MTRP
2 Park entry sign - Entrance at the east end of Father Junipero Serra Trail and Mission Gorge Road
2 Trail system with parking areas
2 Visitor & Interpretive Center enhancements
2 Enhancement of planting (includes design and irrigation system) on San Carlos point at Lake Murray
2 Identify areas in the Park that might be available for additional rock climbing activities and identify funding for appropriate
studies to facilitate CEQA compliance
2 Provide facilities for family and group picnicking near the Big Rock park trailhead in the City of Santee
2 Build a new, more accessible, maintainable and environmentally sensitive trail from the existing Cowles Mountain Staging Area to the summit
3 Restroom at Old Mission Dam
3 Create a small off-street parking area at the Barker Way entrance to the Barker Way trail
3 Expand parking on the easterly side of Father Junipero Sera trail between Mission Gorge Road and the Visitor and Interpretive Center driveway entrance
Also, a PDF of the land acquisition and trail names and areas connecting to Sycamore. Or, shall we say, lack of trails...
http://www.mtrp.org/cac.asp?idno=179721
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Good find OCD. Thanks for the post.
From looking at Google Earth it appears nearly all of the proposed trails highlighted on MTRP's map are fireroads. I sure hope that MTRP doesn't continue to pass off fireroads as "trails". Fortunately I've heard there may be some cool plans for us in this portion of mtrp.
From looking at Google Earth it appears nearly all of the proposed trails highlighted on MTRP's map are fireroads. I sure hope that MTRP doesn't continue to pass off fireroads as "trails". Fortunately I've heard there may be some cool plans for us in this portion of mtrp.
Perspective on Equestrians
SDMBA is working on it, La Costa trail renovation and other recent activities will not be on the list, but the list is telling.
Do not worry. Equestrian use is a good thing nowadays, not bad. We are in the fight for trail access together, so if they recognize equestrians as needing services and connectors like the Stowe trail, then those things indirectly help the mountain bike community as well. I hope that I am correct and someone doesn't trot this message out in two or three years saying I told you so, but I think we as mountain bikers are better organized and able to fight the nonsense that has gone on in the past.
Equestrians are annoying sometimes, but not bad. LPCP is THE only area in the city proper to have issues with multi-trail use. There are no segregated trails or issues at Daley, Goodan, Elfin, etc. The reason why?????
Well, read the Reader article and EBasil's comments.
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2008/dec/10/city-light-2/
The Clews and stable owners in Del Mar have been around for quite awhile, and like us they have lost a lot of territory to ride. I have a feeling they are reactionary "like a caged animal" because they literally have been boxed in by all the development. They had it good, practically a private wonderland before SR56 and Pardee wiped out everything.
As bike riders we can roam around at will and move on. Those poor bastards are stuck with their now horrible location trapped by multiple developments and limited trails, so in a way I can sympathize with their plight. They are totally hosed now, and it will just get worse.
They do need to understand however that they have no business trying to privatize public property or trails for their own use, and are clueless about modern times. We both need to fight together for access, not against each other. They need to learn that their comments at meetings to disparage us do not make a wit of difference and are not productive.
SDMBA is working on it, La Costa trail renovation and other recent activities will not be on the list, but the list is telling.
Do not worry. Equestrian use is a good thing nowadays, not bad. We are in the fight for trail access together, so if they recognize equestrians as needing services and connectors like the Stowe trail, then those things indirectly help the mountain bike community as well. I hope that I am correct and someone doesn't trot this message out in two or three years saying I told you so, but I think we as mountain bikers are better organized and able to fight the nonsense that has gone on in the past.
Equestrians are annoying sometimes, but not bad. LPCP is THE only area in the city proper to have issues with multi-trail use. There are no segregated trails or issues at Daley, Goodan, Elfin, etc. The reason why?????
Well, read the Reader article and EBasil's comments.
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2008/dec/10/city-light-2/
The Clews and stable owners in Del Mar have been around for quite awhile, and like us they have lost a lot of territory to ride. I have a feeling they are reactionary "like a caged animal" because they literally have been boxed in by all the development. They had it good, practically a private wonderland before SR56 and Pardee wiped out everything.
As bike riders we can roam around at will and move on. Those poor bastards are stuck with their now horrible location trapped by multiple developments and limited trails, so in a way I can sympathize with their plight. They are totally hosed now, and it will just get worse.
They do need to understand however that they have no business trying to privatize public property or trails for their own use, and are clueless about modern times. We both need to fight together for access, not against each other. They need to learn that their comments at meetings to disparage us do not make a wit of difference and are not productive.
There is plenty of effort going into things to finalize it but writing it off as done is premature at this point.rathbone said:SDMBA has worked out a deal for the Mission Trails skills park, so that and other recent activities will not be on the list, but the list is telling.
Support (members, community, politcal and monetary) is needed so tell your friends, all the help possible will be needed when the time comes.
This BS reminds me of the piersons milk vetch plant at glamis. They closed 1/3 dunes and found out the plant grows everywhere. But the closed area is still closed.
+1 :thumbsup:rathbone said:Perspective on Equestrians
Interesting...I had been researching this area a few months ago because I ride from the new housing development into Sycamore. It's nice not to have to drive though Poway to get to the trailhead. The info I found said the area is going to be Mission Trails North and they definitely mentioned mt biking. They also had a few more trails that called narrow non fire road. Might have been from the enviro impact report for Stonebridge development.
Perspective on Equestrians: reprise
LPQ being unique due to the Clews political connections and thus ability to leverage pressure against bikers there. Of course, the fact that the committees are stacked with those either directly involved (horses there), or sympathetic with their voice on the issue.
I understand the idea that space is running short for them, and that impacts their ranch. BUT, they made their fortunes from the over-development so I am less sympathetic than rathbone on this point. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too, at our and taxpayers expense.
I wonder how well it would fly if it were worded that they wanted to establish a semi-private horse ranch on the taxpayers coin, rather than they want to protect the environment. (The latter argument, BTW, doesn't hold water considering the time and care the SDMBA and MTC guys spent to avoid any environmental overlap with sensitive species in their trail proposals, AND that this enviro-spunk is coming from a developer (see Reader article)! What cajones.)
All that said, I would like to add, as many have stated before, I really like the equestrians at LPQ. I've had nothing but positive interactions with them (except for one young, antsy horse- but a very good rider), and from the first day at LPQ when I saw the horses on the trails I thought what a wonderful park this is. I still hold those feelings, for the most part.
Nonetheless, that multi-trail use works successfully everywhere else is not a small point in this power play.
All very good points rathbone. Well said.rathbone said:In response to Perspective on Equestrians
LPQ being unique due to the Clews political connections and thus ability to leverage pressure against bikers there. Of course, the fact that the committees are stacked with those either directly involved (horses there), or sympathetic with their voice on the issue.
I understand the idea that space is running short for them, and that impacts their ranch. BUT, they made their fortunes from the over-development so I am less sympathetic than rathbone on this point. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too, at our and taxpayers expense.
I wonder how well it would fly if it were worded that they wanted to establish a semi-private horse ranch on the taxpayers coin, rather than they want to protect the environment. (The latter argument, BTW, doesn't hold water considering the time and care the SDMBA and MTC guys spent to avoid any environmental overlap with sensitive species in their trail proposals, AND that this enviro-spunk is coming from a developer (see Reader article)! What cajones.)
All that said, I would like to add, as many have stated before, I really like the equestrians at LPQ. I've had nothing but positive interactions with them (except for one young, antsy horse- but a very good rider), and from the first day at LPQ when I saw the horses on the trails I thought what a wonderful park this is. I still hold those feelings, for the most part.
Nonetheless, that multi-trail use works successfully everywhere else is not a small point in this power play.
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
ilmfat
761 Replies
DIRTJUNKIE
451 Replies
Sparticus
406 Replies
Recommended Communities
