Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 113 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
The following are the meeting notes of the RTCA meeting held Dec. 20, 2012 at the Hilton Hotel in the Village of Oak Creek. There were 50 plus attendees at the meeting and they were split into the three main user groups (hiker mountain biker and equestrian). There were three different tables of mountain bikers, two tables of hikers and one table of equestrians.

The same four questions were asked at each table and are listed below. The answers by each individual group are given and there is obviously some over lapping answers for each group and the groups as a whole.

At the end of the meeting there was a question period for the FS and most of the questions were presented to Jennifer Burns who also answered the majority of the questions.

It was noted that the information obtained from the meetings would be incorporated into the NEPA document that would be presented to the public over a 30 day period for public comment.


Red Rock Trail Planning Meeting -
December 21, 2012 6-8PM, Hilton VOC
Meeting Notes
USFS Jennifer Burns gave a short presentation about Red Rock trails: the amount of use, trail conditions and maintenance, history of the trail additions and key demographics of users.

Participants were asked to sit at a table that represented one of the main trail user types.

Group exercises included the following questions:
What are the benefits to you as a trail user?
What about the current trail system works for you as a trail user?
What about the current trail system does not work for you as a trail user?
What trail related trends do you see in the future for your sport?
What other areas do you go to and use for trails outside Red Rock?
Bikers Group 1
Benefits:
• Economic benefits
• Higher tourism
• Endorphins healing
• Access nature/ beauty
• Spiritual connection/ our door church
• Commuter to move from point A to B.
What Works:
• Varity of diversity of trails
• Lots of trails
• From mid to experienced riders
• Proximity of trail (lots of access points)
• Available amenities (but need more)
• Connectivity (can make a lot of loops) good for locals not for out of towners
• Trails go by water
• All season access
• Night time rides
What Is Not Working:
• Lack of novice trails in town
• Lack of regional links
• Constant need to expand and change system
• Lack of ability to have all users in same trail
• Conflicts between users lack of specific trails for specific users
• Higher connectivity for commuter use
• Lack of scheduled events
o No races (is a bad thing)
• Lack of features
o Berms
o Jumps
• Attitudes of people
o Inter user conflict
o Lack of education
o Ear buds
o 10% of bikers can be an “A.H.”
o Hikers walking four abreast
o Bikers with uncontrolled dogs
o Hikers with uncontrolled dogs
• Sanitation on a trail ride
o Lack of solid waste receptacles
Future Trends:
• Users desire/want trails to be Steeper/ longer
• Stay longer/ want variety
• Bikes stronger/ lighter= more trails
• More fun
o More trails built with bikes in mind
• Better protective gear
• higher $ in cycling. Better food/lodging
• More events
Other Areas:
• Places to learn From
o Gallup NM
o Sun Valley
o Bend
o Fruita
o Moab (bad example)
o Whistler/ canmore
o Kingstown, VT
o Europe (good for tours/commuter)
o Santa Fe
o Telluride
o Durango
o park city
• Flagstaff
• Prescott
• Tucson
• Black canyon
• Moab
• Durango
• Friuta
• Phoenix
• R.O.W.
• Vancouver
• Whistler
• CO> Trail
• Sun Valley
• Downyville
• Santa Cruz
Bikers Group 2
Benefits:
• Lower blood pressure
• Livelihood
• Solitude
• Therapy
• Social Spiritual
• Exercise/ fitness
• Commute Anger mgmt.
• FUN!
• Happiness
• Smile laugh
• Revenue/ tourism, $ to community
• Excuse to spend $
• Creates culture/ community
What Works:
• Loops/ Stacked loops
• New “flowy” trail
o They are fun, fast, intermediate opportunity , and appeals to wide range of abilities
• Armoring
• Inter connectivity
o Between parts of the system
• Multitude of trip distances and technicality / difficulty
• Accessibility from hotel / homes
• Broad spectrum of challenging
o Technical , rocky, steep, hard to moderate levels
• Beautiful/ scenic
• Signage (but still needs improvement)
• Year round riding
• Not too crowded mostly
o Some are too crowded “cus” they are so good!
• All trail users are somewhat naturally separated, either by tread, features, length, or steepness.
o Example:
 in the wilderness trails
• Hikers on shorter loops
• Horses on sandier trail
 On non-wilderness trails
• Bikers of longer loops—connector
What is Not Working:
• Lack of easy trails
• Not enough stacked loops (need bigger loops)
• Lack of connectivity between some parts of the system. In Part because of wilderness barriers.
• Lack of signage
o Difficulty ratings
o I.E. Chuckwagon showing connection to Devils Bridge, Hangover signing high line, gunslinger @ chuck wagon, Long Canyon to Deadmans Loop
• No camping nearby for tourist trail users
• Overuse is widening trails
o Trails should be narrow
• Social trails from every house
• Old 2 tracks adopted as system routes are unsustainable and fail to meet desired single track experience!
• System is not meeting demand quantitatively system need to be bigger
Future Trends:
• More challenge will be desired as riders and equipment improve
• Returning visitors and local riders want more options to explore
• As MTB grows, more opportunities needed for beginner to intermediate experience.
• High School Interscholastic League will need places for competitive events
o Others need this option as well/ adult racing)
• MTB trail are the new “golf course”
o i.e. instead of buying golf clubs and related gear the trend is to spend more on bike parts and tools, a rise in retiree’s buying bike parts.
• Skills parks, pump tracks, “flow trails,” downhill/ shuttle—able trails
• MTB tourism
• User maintenance and design
Other Areas:
• Black Canyon Trail
• Flagstaff
• White Mountains
• Bootleg/ Boulder City
• Gooseberry/ Hurricane
• Tahoe
• Moab
• Bend
• Whistler
• Park City
• North Rim Grand Canyon
• Phoenix
• Tucson
• Dallas
• Denver

Bikers Group 3
Benefits:
• Diversity of skill and strenuous
• Access points lots and lots both systems & no systems
• Technical challenges
• Exercise
• Quality of life
• Beauty
• Healing physical & mental health
• Social community
What Works:
• Accessibility to the user build trails
• Length of trails
• technical aspects and obstacles
• The narrowness of the trails
• Has begun to adopt the user developed trails
o Narrow and primitive are challenging (that is good)
• Technical nature and sustainability of user developed trails
• Connectivity
• Adopting user built trails into the system
• More miles = less conflict
• New willingness to expand
What Is Not Working:
• Erosion grows because rocks are removed
• Wring type of trail maintenance
• No mtn bike trail plan that facilitates and embraces mtn biking
o Budget needed
• City council is lagging
• Lack of inter connectivity
o Marges Draw and dry creek are examples
• City loop
• Rock jails on curves
• Trail obliterates is destructive in nature and dangerous and unsightly resource damage
• No mechanism to develop a new trail that wasn’t a social trail.
• Dumbed down trails
• Don’t use best practices from elsewhere
• Not utilizing people as resource
• Time frame for adoption is way slower that necessary.
Future Trends:
• Volunteer groups for various reasons
• As bikes get better there may be more need to keep speed down
• As Bike technology improves there needs to more signs showing
o Rating system
o Warnings
o Need for jumping
• More extreme areas
o Bike park areas
 i.e. Eagle bike park Boise
• User specific vs. multi use signage
• Ages under 18 is the fastest growing groups
• Accommodate all needs
o Keep access open
o More federal spending
• Inter connectivity between town, trails, work,
o i.e. there will be more people commuting through the trail system
• Huge destination
o More use and expense
o More skill level
• More entrée level use
• Race loops
o “how do we deal with speed in a safe manner”
• Mtn bike racing

Other Areas:
• Stanley, Idaho
• St George
• Bend, Oregon
• Downy Ville
• Whistler, BC
• Black Rock, Oregon
• Jackson hole
• Moab
• Oak Ridge ,OR
• Antigua, Ovat
• Dear Valley
• Quebec
• Firneg and Nelson, BC
• Prescott
• Flagstaff
• Black Canyon City
• South Mtn
• Gold Canyon
• McDowell Mingus
• Mt Lemon
• Dead Horse
• Fruita
Hikers Group 1
Benefits:
• Feels good, keeps you healthy
• Social interaction
• Solitude
• Awe
What Works:
• Variety of trail lengths and difficulty
o Invites users
o Great trail for day hikers
o Red Rock pass provides support/info
• Number of trails
o Provides choice
• System leads to space, silence, solitude, and new experience.
• Overall condition of trails is good
o Safe and easy
• Signs at junctions work
• Accommodates many users large quantity of different abilities and interests
What Is Not Working :
• Various users do not always follow decorum
• Unprepared hikers/ users
• Staying in designated trail
• Congestion on most popular trails
• Deceptively east for visitors and dangerous
o Sunset v. twilight
o Cellphone reception
• Confusing fee system
• Lack of signs and no distance indicators (mileage)
• Not many trails from campgrounds
• No trail rating at trail head or F.S. guide
• Lack of trail decorum:
o Dogs unleashed
o Silent/ speedy bikers
o Staying on trails
• Wear and tear on trail systems (level of maintenance)
• Poor visitor education
o Beyond FS and Chamber
• Need for respect and reverence for the land
Future Trends:
• Aging of hiking population
• Gender equality
• Volume will increase
• Funding at risk
• Increase of biker use and extreme sports people, geocaching.
• Increased public education through the internet
o Pros and cons (internet and GPS)
o Increasing access to fragile and dangerous areas, as well as archeology problems.
• Increased volunteerism
• Increased environmental impact.
Other Areas:
• Utah
• Flagstaff
• Grand Canyon
• Rockies
• Sierras
• Cascades
Hikers Group 2
Benefits:
• Exercise
• Lots of variety
• Scenery/spiritual
• Nature experience
• Easy access (loops)
o Accessible from all neighborhoods
• Entertainment
• Social interaction/local knowledge
• Exploration
• Solitude
• Some old signs (“fragile reveg”) on social trails.
What Works:
• Different designation =appropriate use (signage)
• Good maps—Forest guide and Xerox copies
• Trails are clean
• Forest service and chamber have knowledgeable volunteers to advise hikers
• Local organizations (westerners) help to create safe hikes
What Does Not Work:
• Better updating of trail info
• Complementary usage with horses, bikers
o Tear up trail
• Crowding on select trails
o “(internet only covers some – 4)”
• Lack of trailhead capacity parking
• Poor info dissemination of all trails
o Too much focus on few trails (media coverage)
o Armoring on steep trails (slippery!)
• Trails lack rating system
o Needs to be at trail head
• Visitors lack preparedness
• To many social trails
• Signage needs improvements
o Distance
o Elevation]
• Bikers going too fast and too close
o E.g. around curves
o Can’t hear them
• Little leash usage
Future Trends:
• More dogs
• More usage/people
• Rise in mtn biking (media and general)
• More trail runners
• Rise in request for special events
• Rise in use of electronics
o GPS
o Phones
• Rise in demand for trail usage from people with physical disabilities
• Want more maintenance
Other Areas:
• Flagstaff
• Mingus Mnt
• Rainbow Plateau
• Grand Canyon
• Tucson/Phoenix
• Rocky Mnt
• Fossil Creek
• Colorado
• Sycamore
Equestrians Group 1
Benefits:
• Training horses
• Social
• Health/ exercise (for both people and horses)
• Original usage for trails
• Spiritual
• New areas to explore (that would be too long of a hike otherwise)
What Works:
• Great views
• Few conflicts with other users
• Good change in elevation
• Good diversity of trails
• Loop trails are popular (need more)
• Wilderness trails are preferred
o Taylor Cabin Trail
o Sycamore Canyon
• Connectivity of trails (keep trail connected)
• There are enough trails (so long as they stay open
• Don’t have to trailer (easy access points near housing)
• Good trails for locals
What Is Not Working:
• Small parking spaces (typically used up by other user groups)
o Schnebly
o Lack of “trailers only” parking signs
• No restrooms at majority of trail systems
 “10 out of 10 need more bathrooms”
• More connector trails
• Less closures for connector trails (generally worry of losing current trails)
o Templeton, Bell rock, Chuck wagon
• Signage
o i.e. Slick rock, blind corners, ledges, etiquette, difficulty level
• Maintenance
o Templeton
• Lack of horse friendly gates
• Lack of switch backs on steep areas (vs. armoring)
Future Trends:
• Larger trailer for horses (need larger parking areas)
• Larger groups of horses
o Higher usage
• More people coming from out of state
o Bigger rigs with living quarters
o More parking with dispersed campers
Other Places:
• Bill Grey Area
o Less congested
o Good elevation
o Good flat/fast/ideal footing
• Cornville
o High horse areas (where most horse owners live)
o Less congested good elevation
o Good flat/fast/ and ideal footing
• S. West side of 260
o Clarkdale to Camp Verde against Mingus Mnt
• Flagstaff to rim
o Cooler weather for summer months
o Shady
o Parking
• Cottonwood/ dead horse
• Places to learn from
o Groom creek
o Bell trail (not good)

Final Discussion/Feedback about meeting:
• Location/ noise
• 2 hours is good, any more = fatigue
Things to change
• Social media site between mtgs online forum to discuss before meeting
• Use meeting time for work not intros
• Have time after meeting with FS to answer questions
• Prepare agenda and send out prior to meeting (2 weeks)
• Notes on website to communicate what is happening
• Start on time
• Info dissemination (outdoor rec report) to be posted on website
• Pointed out IMBA website
• Bibliography/ references
• Provide links to info
• RSS feed on FS website
• What about motorized trails planning?
• Not in RR area we’re talking about – this is non-motorized trail planning
What is big picture of process?
• Clarification of process in meeting
• What weight does this process have in final outcome/ decisions at FS
• Q: What is this process
• District wants to update the plan for trails
• Build on steps of process
• Next meeting will share FS resource info
• Then group can begin working on strategies for future
• 1998 process what impact did it have on Plan – a lot
• How to deal with disagreements/ conflicts if info in draft Final plan NEPA process will allow for input – this is the first part in the process…the solid ideas from this group will need to go out to a broader audience per the 30 day required NEPA scoping and comment period
• This is front end loading of NEPA; it would help if this group reachs out to others to educate about the process and get them involved.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 · (Edited)
Article About the 12-20-2012 RTCA Meeting

This is an article done in the Sedona local paper about the meeting.
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I'm confused. Was the meeting on the 20th or the 21st?
Thanks for pointing that out. The notes sent out by the FS currently say 12-21-2012, but upon checking the calender the meetings are on the 3rd. Thursday of each month so 12-20 is the correct date.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,211 Posts
Thanks for pointing that out. The notes sent out by the FS currently say 12-21-2012, but upon checking the calender the meetings are on the 3rd. Thursday of each month so 12-20 is the correct date.
Whew, now I can sleep at night.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,785 Posts
Since this is such an important meeting! Could you ask East coast or West Coast, if one just wants to kick their feet up, drink a beverage and watch the waves.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Is this the meeting you almost got thrown out of? Or was it another one?
read.
Eazy_E:

Good to have you back, boy did you get your butt kicked on that archeology thread. I felt real sorry for you, I am curious if you have any remorse? Now you know what it feels like to have nobody like you.

Back to your question. NO this meeting was different. Rather than placing me in a set up situation with a bunch of TD haters, I got to sit with my mountain bike buddies.

As you my remember Cate the RTCA facilitator had posted questions prior to the meeting on the internet. This was done for my benefit and may be a few other dummies that have a hard time trying to understand the questions and how they relate to the development of the new Sedona Trail Management Plan. I have no idea what the question "where else do you go mountain biking" has to do with developing the Sedona Trail Management Plan.

Anyway when the facilitator got to the last meeting she forgot to bring her questions she had posted (for my benefit) and she switched the questions. So the hours and hours I had spent writing down my answers were totally wasted. I could have built 200 yards of trail with all the time I spent on those questions.

Anyway the moderator of our table was the head of the Sedona Red Rock Ranger District, Heather. Boy did she get a good feel for the core mountain biking group in Sedona. These are the answers for our group:

What are the benefits to you as a trail user?
What about the current trail system works for you as a trail user?
What about the current trail system does not work for you as a trail user?
What trail related trends do you see in the future for your sport?
What other areas do you go to and use for trails outside Red Rock?
Bikers Group 3
Benefits:
• Diversity of skill and strenuous
• Access points lots and lots both systems & no systems
• Technical challenges
• Exercise
• Quality of life
• Beauty
• Healing physical & mental health
• Social community
What Works:
• Accessibility to the user build trails
• Length of trails
• technical aspects and obstacles
• The narrowness of the trails
• Has begun to adopt the user developed trails
o Narrow and primitive are challenging (that is good)
• Technical nature and sustainability of user developed trails
• Connectivity
• Adopting user built trails into the system
• More miles = less conflict
• New willingness to expand
What Is Not Working:
• Erosion grows because rocks are removed
• Wring type of trail maintenance
• No mtn bike trail plan that facilitates and embraces mtn biking
o Budget needed
• City council is lagging
• Lack of inter connectivity
o Marges Draw and dry creek are examples
• City loop
• Rock jails on curves
• Trail obliterates is destructive in nature and dangerous and unsightly resource damage
• No mechanism to develop a new trail that wasn't a social trail.
• Dumbed down trails
• Don't use best practices from elsewhere
• Not utilizing people as resource
• Time frame for adoption is way slower that necessary.
Future Trends:
• Volunteer groups for various reasons
• As bikes get better there may be more need to keep speed down
• As Bike technology improves there needs to more signs showing
o Rating system
o Warnings
o Need for jumping
• More extreme areas
o Bike park areas
 i.e. Eagle bike park Boise
• User specific vs. multi use signage
• Ages under 18 is the fastest growing groups
• Accommodate all needs
o Keep access open
o More federal spending
• Inter connectivity between town, trails, work,
o i.e. there will be more people commuting through the trail system
• Huge destination
o More use and expense
o More skill level
• More entrée level use
• Race loops
o "how do we deal with speed in a safe manner"
• Mtn bike racing

Other Areas:
• Stanley, Idaho
• St George
• Bend, Oregon
• Downy Ville
• Whistler, BC
• Black Rock, Oregon
• Jackson hole
• Moab
• Oak Ridge ,OR
• Antigua, Ovat
• Dear Valley
• Quebec
• Firneg and Nelson, BC
• Prescott
• Flagstaff
• Black Canyon City
• South Mtn
• Gold Canyon
• McDowell Mingus
• Mt Lemon
• Dead Horse
• Fruita
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
FALSE DEMOCRACY: Inviting people's input when you've already made up your mind. Also, the easiest way to crush the enthusiasm of the user groups to ever work with the FS in a cooperative manner again.

Burns said "we're not at the point yet where we're going to ask the question 'what should the future trail system look like?'"

In reference to the 1998 FS recreation trail plan: What impact did the public meeting process have on the plan? ANSWER: "A lot".
 

·
Red Rock Roller
Joined
·
348 Posts
Sounds like the FS is gathering useful info and opinion from the right source. As long as the meetings continue moving forward the public can ensure that the FS doesn't debate the trail plan to a point it's no longer relevant, Uncle Sam has a way of doing this!

Now all the FS has to do is allow the community to be part of the next process, placing importance to opinion and ideas of the answered questions in a manner that offers all user groups the least amount of compromise. This step I feel is the most important to the MTB user group as this is where we can express to the FS that trails suited for MTB can be used by all groups and meeting our needs will improve the user experience for all!!!

This next step is critical for MTB as this is where we can get our voice heard, understood and highly considered. I would be at the next meeting but since it is on for the day after my surgery I may not feel up to it we'll see.

TD,
Take your passion and your ideas and using the info gathered from the questions, take your agenda and kick it into high gear!!! Come at them with every idea you can find support and need for in the public opinion and show them all how supporting your ideas will benifit all user groups! I hope you have some credibility left with the user groups and the FS, if not and your ideas were delivered appropriately it shouldn't matter.

Your time is now go peacock on their asses! They won't be able to argue with solutions offered that are supported by public opinion that was obtained by the FS themselves. Use your great proven ideas to give weight to what should be given priority in the process of forming the trail plan!

You have great ideas and plans no one can argue that, how you go about obtaining support, getting opinion on forums and expressing them to others...needs more tact! SHOVE YOUR IDEAS DOWN THE FS's THROAT!!!! Till they choke!!!! Present it in a manner that will be we'll received (i.e. something the FS can work with that solves issues, doesn't put them on the defensive and improves the trail use to the majority of users.) keep it positive and SEPERATE YOURSELF from your ideas and take the "me me me" tone out of it!

Will the real TD please stand up!!! Forget the "what trails are adopted" crap for now and focus on strengthening the MTB voice and opinion the FS hears and considers. Make the FS say to themselves "you know, taking the needs of the MTB community into consideration will improve the use for all". All of your ideas, issues and concerns are not needed, just the ones that reinforce the "if it's good for MTB it's good for all" concept.

Of course this is just a suggestion. If I had your experience and knowledge of trail building I would be there loud and proud right next to you even after surgery, but I don't and I don't share your trail building passion and I'm barely in the sport as we speak, so please respect my decision to participate when and how I choose!

Good luck in presenting your ideas and solutions when prioritizing the considering factors of the trail plan!!!

Words to live by..."it's easier to influence someone to change than it is to force them" or "when in Rome"
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Sounds like the FS is gathering useful info and opinion from the right source. As long as the meetings continue moving forward the public can ensure that the FS doesn't debate the trail plan to a point it's no longer relevant, Uncle Sam has a way of doing this!

Now all the FS has to do is allow the community to be part of the next process, placing importance to opinion and ideas of the answered questions in a manner that offers all user groups the least amount of compromise. This step I feel is the most important to the MTB user group as this is where we can express to the FS that trails suited for MTB can be used by all groups and meeting our needs will improve the user experience for all!!!

This next step is critical for MTB as this is where we can get our voice heard, understood and highly considered. I would be at the next meeting but since it is on for the day after my surgery I may not feel up to it we'll see.

TD,
Take your passion and your ideas and using the info gathered from the questions, take your agenda and kick it into high gear!!! Come at them with every idea you can find support and need for in the public opinion and show them all how supporting your ideas will benifit all user groups! I hope you have some credibility left with the user groups and the FS, if not and your ideas were delivered appropriately it shouldn't matter.

Your time is now go peacock on their asses! They won't be able to argue with solutions offered that are supported by public opinion that was obtained by the FS themselves. Use your great proven ideas to give weight to what should be given priority in the process of forming the trail plan!

You have great ideas and plans no one can argue that, how you go about obtaining support, getting opinion on forums and expressing them to others...needs more tact! SHOVE YOUR IDEAS DOWN THE FS's THROAT!!!! Till they choke!!!! Present it in a manner that will be we'll received (i.e. something the FS can work with that solves issues, doesn't put them on the defensive and improves the trail use to the majority of users.) keep it positive and SEPERATE YOURSELF from your ideas and take the "me me me" tone out of it!

Will the real TD please stand up!!! Forget the "what trails are adopted" crap for now and focus on strengthening the MTB voice and opinion the FS hears and considers. Make the FS say to themselves "you know, taking the needs of the MTB community into consideration will improve the use for all". All of your ideas, issues and concerns are not needed, just the ones that reinforce the "if it's good for MTB it's good for all" concept.

Of course this is just a suggestion. If I had your experience and knowledge of trail building I would be there loud and proud right next to you even after surgery, but I don't and I don't share your trail building passion and I'm barely in the sport as we speak, so please respect my decision to participate when and how I choose!

Good luck in presenting your ideas and solutions when prioritizing the considering factors of the trail plan!!!

Words to live by..."it's easier to influence someone to change than it is to force them" or "when in Rome"
You make some good points and as the RTCA meeting process progresses, I hope to be able to articulate information that will help improve the mountain biker user experience in Sedona, that can be incorporated in the final document.

I have been trying to find the Prior 1998 Trail Management Plan which I think maybe part of Amendment 12, but so far have been unsuccessful. I would like to read the most current Coconino Trails Management Plan to see how that plan addressed the mountain biking community needs.

I would also like to read a recent National Forest Trails Management Plan from an area that has a large mountain biking group such as Bend, OR or Jackson Hole, WY.
 

·
Red Rock Roller
Joined
·
348 Posts

·
Red Rock Roller
Joined
·
348 Posts
ER:

I looked through the document and it seems like the trail plan is missing. Can someone direct me to the location of the Trail Management Portion?
TD,

Check into the management area 1-20 file page 12 for MA-1 Wilderness plan, page 103 for MA-14 Oak Creek Canyon plan.

Check into management area 21 thru 29 Sedona amendment 12 file for the Sedona area plan. Recreational use is covered in this document starting on replacement page 206-22.

Good hunting!! :thumbsup:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
TD,

Check into the management area 1-20 file page 12 for MA-1 Wilderness plan, page 103 for MA-14 Oak Creek Canyon plan.

Seems like this is only Wilderness Related Areas

Check into management area 21 thru 29 Sedona amendment 12 file for the Sedona area plan. Recreational use is covered in this document starting on replacement page 206-22.

OK I see where this may apply, but it seems like it is more geared to vortexing not mountain biking
 

Attachments

·
Red Rock Roller
Joined
·
348 Posts
TD,
The info you seek is mostly found in the Sedona ammendment 12 document starting on page 18 of 54. Map 6 shows the trails.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
One thing for sure when you read the existing Coconino Forest Plan reqarding trails is that there have been a lot of changes that were never planned for by the FS or the existing trails at the time were never included on the black and map shown below.

Just in the Soldiers Wash area there were two trails listed now there are at least thirteen trails there as shown by the Aerial map.

It seemed like at the time of the document the main trails being show cased were wilderness type trails.

At the RTCA meeting we are being show two maps. One is the new Bear Tooth CORE map. The other is a FS type map that doesn't include a lot of the popular current user built trails. Certainly none of the Shadows extra special HIKING ONLY trails are being shown anywhere I know of.

You have to wonder what the status is of all those non publicly shared trails that are secretly hiked by the more knowledgeable old timer type hikers. am curious how those trails will be addressed at the RTCA meetings.

Will those hiker user built trails be just kept a secret and there will be a SECRET HANDSHAKE between the FS and the secret hiking community and they will be allowed to be kept intact or they will need to be naturalized like the trails in the Casner Canyon Area.

I think this is an important part of the Trail Management Process that needs to be discussed, so the mountain bikers can continue to ride those trails that haven't been adopted yet. There may be a double standard that should be discussed to see where we stand.

I have been doing extensive surveys of hikers using the mountain bike user built trail system and the major consensus is that the hikers really like the mountain bike user built trails.

I interviewed a hiker on the Pyramid trail today and she said she loves to hike that trail. It was one of her favorite hikes and she had no problem sharing it with the mountain bike community. What is surprising is that trail has been in existence for hundreds of years and it isn't even on either map being shown at the RTCA meetings.

When the RTCA meeting finally moves to the actual trail planning process it will be interesting how the process addresses all of the 70 miles of TD mapped non- adopted mountain bike user built trails and all of the non-mapped Shadow built trails used exclusively by the elite Sedona hiking community?
 

Attachments

·
Red Rock Roller
Joined
·
348 Posts
TD,

That trail plan was loosely followed to put it mildly! Some of the bullet items were never addressed and there was ABSOLUTELY no mention of the "protected research area" just north of Cow Pies! WTF!! I think that issue needs to be readdressed and possibly factored into the trail plan.


I believe the official FS position on user built trails that exist is unless otherwise noted it is open for use weather or not it's been cataloged by the FS.

As for the "shadow trails" I'm going to say they will remain in seceret status. TD were these trails "hiked into existance" or "cut in"? It's my understanding there is nothing that can be controled when users walk or ride a trail into existance! (Hint hint) So if the Shadow trails are kept a seceret then I see no reason why the MTB users couldn't ride their own (yours, and others) handshake trails into existance as well just as long as a tool doesn't hit the dirt and a rock or boulder isn't intentionally moved! Let that sleeping dog lay quietly use the 7 P's and wait for premium conditions and it's a "seceret ride"!!

After further thoughts it would be in the best interests of all users to abide by the wishes of the FS as to refrain from riding off trail, but I too ride off trail from time to time exploring the areas since I haven't lived here too long. So the only real solution is for the FS to eliminate the need users have for such activity, with a pro-active plan and prove real intentions of fullfling those needs with swift action that addresses real concerns about how to, in a timely, cost efficient manner, produce sustainable results to meet those concerns and needs. With the community supporting a comprehensive plan they can ensure that the FS stays focused and has all the available resources (the community can provide) it needs to; continue the plan, to readdress any new or changing circumstances that may provoke unwanted activity and promote the user/land manager relationship.
 
1 - 20 of 113 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.
Top