[moschika]

this was on the front page of the Press Democrat here in Santa Rosa.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100705/ARTICLES/100709758/1350?Title=Unwanted-trail-blazers-

i didn't even realize that there were that many illegal trails in the park. hard to imagine but they estimate double the miles of illegal trails v. legal trails.

i can't cast the first stone, but definitely gives one reason to pause.

 

[redmr2_man]

byebye funfun.

 

[bdamschen]

“These guys are talking about not having a trail that’s aggressive enough,” Birkland said. “When you have 44 miles of trails built for you, why do you need to carve up your own?"

This quote is great. He pretty much answered his own question. Build for different skill levels, not just the lowest common denominator. I'll bet if there were trails built with higher skill levels in mind, you'd see a huge drop in the amount of illegal trails created by cyclists.

 

[Fast Eddy]

byebye funfun.

I disagree. It's status quo.

I also diagree with the notion that MTBers need more "rippin trails". When I head up there, my people always want to show me the latest and greatest, but I prefer the existing trails.

Anytime I have been on an unofficial trail, the experience has proven to be positive, to say the least. Whoever's building those trails would make a proud addition to the state's volunteer efforts. The off-trail trails are very well-designed.

My only experience with Ranger B. was less than positive. He came across as very uptight and unfriendly. This was on Channel Dr too, not even in the park.

I don't, in any way, buy into the statement that the extra trails are hurting the environment. The existing trails pass through the same areas. SOD? Really? If they've got it on one side of the park, they have it in the whole park.

What Annadel really needs are some donations kiosks at the popular entrances resembling the steel payment tubes at self-serve parking lots and camp sites. Thousands of people use the park every day without paying, and I think most of them would drop a buck to help the park if there was a way to do so.

 

[JMac47]

Wrong assumption

This quote is great. He pretty much answered his own question. Build for different skill levels, not just the lowest common denominator. I'll bet if there were trails built with higher skill levels in mind, you'd see a huge drop in the amount of illegal trails created by cyclists.

First off, it's not a "bike park", it's multi-use. Are you saying the equestrians should have a steeple chase course set up on Lake Trail? Maybe a calf roping arena in one of the meadows? Let's keep the "entitlements" in check here.

I heard scuttle butt about Ranger Bob's concerns a couple weeks ago, and read the article in the paper this morning. Although the topic touched on mtb use, it didn't seem to come accross too hard, infact a comment was directed to a "hiker" that was off on one of the unmapped trails.

Though I do not believe in "trail building", periodic trail maintainence while on a ride such as moving debri or downed trees to avoid the re-routes people start is an acceptable task to limit damage.

 

[Rex_Skidmore]

this was on the front page of the Press Democrat

The author of the article and the editor of the paper should be banned from MTBR for "posting" illegal trails. lawlz

 

[cohenfive]

a couple of observations...

note that while the article highlights the mtn bikers use of illegal trails, there were i believe two quotes from people actually on illegal trails and they were both hikers...so even the illegal trails seem to be multi-use. adel is a great park that needs more funding to maintain. i agree with the idea of paid parking more broadly applied, that is if the $18 car fee does not pass in november. i'm a state parks member so get some parking permits from my donations...which i think is a great tradeoff.

 

[jo_ride]

I'd like to say that most illegal trails are started by hikers. I can't tell you the number of hikers I see bush-whacking it off trail. It's only when the trail appears to be ridable that a biker will hit it. I've been hiking and biking in Annadel for 30 years.

 

[GuruAtma]

This is the second anti-bike article in the last couple weeks. Previously it was a roadie vs. cars article.

The extra-credit trails at annadel are sometimes poorly made, but most often they are in better shape and better designed than the legal trails. While South Burma has been eroding to a rutted mess, some nearby trails are well-built, with water draining off to the side rather than down the center of the trail.

I've also seen a guided group of 30 Oakmonters (nearby retirement community), traipsing through a meadow, off trail. When I mentioned that they're supposed to stay on the trails, they replied "but animals do it".

 

[Unknown Kowalski]

I've also seen a guided group of 30 Oakmonters (nearby retirement community), traipsing through a meadow, off trail. QUOTE]

They were probably on their way to break into the house with the strange rocks in the bottom of the pool.

 

[jbt56]

I've also seen a guided group of 30 Oakmonters (nearby retirement community), traipsing through a meadow, off trail. QUOTE]

They were probably on their way to break into the house with the strange rocks in the bottom of the pool.

:thumbsup:

BTW, I'd like to try some of these "illegal" trails. They must be in better shape than the "legal" ones, which have gotten to be nothing but rocks with a little dirt in between.

 

[Spindelatron]

The author of the article and the editor of the paper should be banned from MTBR for "posting" illegal trails. lawlz

+one1

 

[moschika]

First off, it's not a "bike park", it's multi-use. Are you saying the equestrians should have a steeple chase course set up on Lake Trail? Maybe a calf roping arena in one of the meadows? Let's keep the "entitlements" in check here.

I heard scuttle butt about Ranger Bob's concerns a couple weeks ago, and read the article in the paper this morning. Although the topic touched on mtb use, it didn't seem to come accross too hard, infact a comment was directed to a "hiker" that was off on one of the unmapped trails.

Though I do not believe in "trail building", periodic trail maintainence while on a ride such as moving debri or downed trees to avoid the re-routes people start is an acceptable task to limit damage.

unfortunately, i doubt anyone will remember that part. i saw a friend earlier today who hikes the park say she read the article today about the "bad mtbrs" in the park. i had to remind her that it wasn't just mtbrs in the article. with the increase popularity of cycling, in general in the county and the increased growing pains that come with it, mtbrs looked like the biggest and only culprit.

 

[Brewtality]

which have gotten to be nothing but rocks with a little dirt in between.

You say that like its a bad thing. The rocks with a little bit of dirt between them is why I go to Annadel.

The main take away I get from the article is this is a park that has not grown its legal trail system over the last 30 years, but the number of users has risen considerably. More users means crowded trails. Crowded trails will result in more un-authorized trails, increased errosion to existing trails and increases in trail user conflicts.

 

[Fast Eddy]

The main take away I get from the article is this is a park that has not grown its legal trail system over the last 30 years, but the number of users has risen considerably.

Maybe it has not grown in miles, but a large number of the current trails used to be boring fire roads and they have been converted into 'rippin' singletrack.

Since I have been riding there (20 years?), the number of illegal singletrack trails has not increased, but the quality of them has increased substantially. The illegal builders are very good at what they do.

 

[pimpbot]

this was on the front page of the Press Democrat here in Santa Rosa.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100705/ARTICLES/100709758/1350?Title=Unwanted-trail-blazers-

i didn't even realize that there were that many illegal trails in the park. hard to imagine but they estimate double the miles of illegal trails v. legal trails.

i can't cast the first stone, but definitely gives one reason to pause.

Too much Ha-Ha pretty soon Boo-Hoo

 

[Unknown Kowalski]

Maybe it has not grown in miles, but a large number of the current trails used to be boring fire roads and they have been converted into 'rippin' singletrack.

Since I have been riding there (20 years?), the number of illegal singletrack trails has not increased, but the quality of them has increased substantially. The illegal builders are very good at what they do.

Why is it that the illegal trails get more trail work days that the legal trails? I keep waiting for a trail work day so I can do my part but aside from one by REI like last year there hasn't been anything.

What they need are some trail work days at Jack London. If ever there was a place that was ripe for awesome trails built right, that would be it. If they did it right, it would take a lot of pressure off of Annadel.

And for the record, I don't ride the illegal stuff at Annadel. Tempted yes, but when I ride in Marin and see how being on a bike makes you a second class citizen, I appreciate the fact that every trail but one in Annadel is game on for bikes. Why screw that up?

 

[bdamschen]

First off, it's not a "bike park", it's multi-use. Are you saying the equestrians should have a steeple chase course set up on Lake Trail? Maybe a calf roping arena in one of the meadows? Let's keep the "entitlements" in check here.

I heard scuttle butt about Ranger Bob's concerns a couple weeks ago, and read the article in the paper this morning. Although the topic touched on mtb use, it didn't seem to come accross too hard, infact a comment was directed to a "hiker" that was off on one of the unmapped trails.

Though I do not believe in "trail building", periodic trail maintainence while on a ride such as moving debri or downed trees to avoid the re-routes people start is an acceptable task to limit damage.

Hmmm, where did I say anything about "bike park" style trails? Where did I say anything about "entitlements"?

The article and Ranger Bob identified a problem, and I threw out a possible solution. More difficult trails don't mean man made trail features, it just means they're more challenging to riders. It just means that the trail was originally designed and laid out with a fun bike trail in mind. I've ridden plenty of multi-use trails that are fun for bikes, a prime example would be Noble Canyon trail in San Diego.

It's too bad you don't believe in "trail building" because with out it, you would never have any trails to ride in the first place.

 

[erginguney]

note that while the article highlights the mtn bikers use of illegal trails, there were i believe two quotes from people actually on illegal trails and they were both hikers...

Nice catch! :thumbsup:

 

[rensho]

I like the article for its fairly unbiased tone.

I wonder if the park would consider reviewing some/all of the illegal trails and make them legal. Surely not all the trails are poorly built, and/or go through some protected super rare plant.

It is sad that when new trails are asked for, the reply is they're too expensive. Yet, when trails exist, free, out of thin air, there isn't enough consideration to keep/bless/modify them.