Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As we move toward putting a new system map together and installing signs in Otero and Cedro, I'll need to get a consensus on what names go with what trails.

I'll use a couple of sources (such as the old Cedro map) but for starters clear these up for me.

If the west ridge (I think it's called Rambo) and Tio Janito are considered one trail (it will be shown as one on the map), what should the name be?

Also, what is the "official" name for Gnasty w/a G? Would the trail name just be "Gnasty" or "Gnasty w/a G" or what?

I'll have some additional ones coming in the future.

Thanks,

Kerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
"Gnasty w/a G" is what the sign says, assuming it's still there.

I refer to the west ridge, as, the west ridge. I have heard it called Rambo as well. Tio Juanito drops from the west ridge/Rambo down to Otero Canyon. Couldn't you just keep those names?
 

·
High Alpine Adventure
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
"Gnasty w/a G" is what the sign says, assuming it's still there.

I refer to the west ridge, as, the west ridge. I have heard it called Rambo as well. Tio Juanito drops from the west ridge/Rambo down to Otero Canyon. Couldn't you just keep those names?
And don't forget "Tunero" (Connector from "Top of Tunnel" intersection with "Rambo" over to Otero.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
Gnasty just isn't so nasty anymore. How about "Sally w/an S"?

And the West Ridge is just the West Ridge.

Perhaps we should come up with a different name for Tio Juanito or just simply call the whole thing the West Ridge Trail. Then we could have the East Ridge Trail.

Wish it would stop raining so I could go ride my bike.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
Gnasty just isn't so nasty anymore. How about "Sally w/an S"?
Just cut to the chase and name the trail "Sally Wans"

And the West Ridge is just the West Ridge.
Perhaps we should come up with a different name for Tio Juanito or just simply call the whole thing the West Ridge Trail.
Makes sense

Wish it would stop raining so I could go ride my bike.......
Yep.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Yeah. I realize there will be some folks that won't like letting go of some of the old names but the Tunero/Rambo/Tio Juanito will be designated as one trail. It makes sense from a mapping and signage perspective. West Ridge makes sense to me....that's what I call it. Sally w/an S? Fine with me but you suggested it!

K
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
I don't like the idea of Rambo/West Ridge/Whatever sharing a name with Tio Juanito because of the "the only trail turns left here" implication.

I, personally, am not resigned to the fact that riders will never again be able to proceed southward beyond the turn down Tio Juanito, and I doubt that very many other people outside the govt agencies are either. But then, you can always make the case that they're the govt's trails, not ours.

Furthermore, I don't particularly like the idea of officially obscuring the fact that it was unamed individuals, not the FS, that took the initiative to connect the top of the west ridge with Otero below.

Maybe I'm just being sentimental, but I say give constructive civil disobedience its due, and recognize Tio Juanito as a distinct trail, and call the trail leading to the top, The This Whole Military Reservation Thing Still Stinks Trail, or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
The only problem is that the only legal trail does turn there. If you as a user continue to ride in the withdrawal despite the signs/rules/whatever, that's your choice (although I wouldn't advocate for it even though I hear it's pretty nice trail...) but to other present users not planning on passing the sign as well as new trail users it makes sense. Furthermore, there are other implications such as how the USFS inventories and manages trails (it's a long boring story I assure you), and since the West Ridge Trail (or whatever you call it) is currently designated as non-motorized, then attaching Tio to it keeps it in the non-motorized side of things.

In terms of taking the initiative to connect the two trails, I'll hand that one to you. It doesn't favor the USFS to waffle on getting stuff like that completed. I appreciate the fact that users can grow frustrated with inaction. However, I'll also say I hope folks will understand that I intend on actually getting stuff done and would appreciate folks floating ideas to me rather than going out on their own since I'll have to spend time closing out that stuff and that's a lot of wasted time and energy on both our parts.

I don't regard the trails as "government trails," it's public land therefore they're public trails. However, the USFS has a duty to manage the lands to a certain standard. I'm hoping to raise that standard and give these trails the attention they deserve.

Thanks,

Kerry
 

·
Bandolero
Joined
·
2,438 Posts
I m h o

Maybe I'm just being sentimental, but I say give constructive civil disobedience its due, and recognize Tio Juanito as a distinct trail, and call the trail leading to the top, The This Whole Military Reservation Thing Still Stinks Trail, or something.
How about "Strangely Hypnotic Air Force Trail - Bad Idea Keeping Everyone RabidlyScreaming"

It's long, but maybe just use the acronym.
 

·
High Alpine Adventure
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
... there are other implications such as how the USFS inventories and manages trails (it's a long boring story I assure you), and since the West Ridge Trail (or whatever you call it) is currently designated as non-motorized, then attaching Tio to it keeps it in the non-motorized side of things.
Great idea!!! Let's join all of the trails to it and call it "Otero"! Then the whole dang system will be "Non-Motorized/Non-Wilderness"! I like that! :thumbsup:

... the USFS has a duty to manage the lands to a certain standard. I'm hoping to raise that standard and give these trails the attention they deserve.
And you are doing a great job of it Kerry! :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
... but to other present users not planning on passing the sign as well as new trail users it makes sense. ...
Thanks,
Kerry
Yes, that point is/was obvious, but unfortunately it's also my point. By essentially creating a closed loop with the 2 trails, and illustrating it on a govt map, to be used as the de facto reference, the entire history of the situation becomes officially deleted with respect to future users unfamiliar with it. I think it's very appropriate to have the ridge trail clearly illustrated as dead-ending at the boundary on your map, with Tio Juanito branching off of it. That it branches off very near the dead end is irrelevant, if the object is to accurately portray the trail system.

I know that you're a reasonable fellow, and the FS obviously can't disregard the restrictions in the desgn of the map. But, I'll tell you what would make one heck of a lot of sense to me, is illustrating former FS trails within what is certainly going to be a shaded area on the map representing the military reservation. After all, the trails are still there, and will almost certainly remain in usable condition far into the future (unless the military decides to bomb them, or something), and they really are FS trails, and we just might, through some miracle, regain access to them someday, in which case, you wouldn't want to have to revise your map now would you? And ... in the meantime, people who refer to your map, are reminded of this atrocious abuse of power by the military.

Thanks for listening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
Yes, that point is/was obvious, but unfortunately it's also my point. By essentially creating a closed loop with the 2 trails, and illustrating it on a govt map, to be used as the de facto reference, the entire history of the situation becomes officially deleted with respect to future users unfamiliar with it. I think it's very appropriate to have the ridge trail clearly illustrated as dead-ending at the boundary on your map, with Tio Juanito branching off of it. That it branches off very near the dead end is irrelevant, if the object is to accurately portray the trail system.

I know that you're a reasonable fellow, and the FS obviously can't disregard the restrictions in the desgn of the map. But, I'll tell you what would make one heck of a lot of sense to me, is illustrating former FS trails within what is certainly going to be a shaded area on the map representing the military reservation. After all, the trails are still there, and will almost certainly remain in usable condition far into the future (unless the military decides to bomb them, or something), and they really are FS trails, and we just might, through some miracle, regain access to them someday, in which case, you wouldn't want to have to revise your map now would you? And ... in the meantime, people who refer to your map, are reminded of this atrocious abuse of power by the military.

Thanks for listening.
Well said.

The amount of land the DOE would have to concede on the west ridge, to connect the upper Otero waterfall and Otero Canyon, is trivial. Recovering that slice of trail was a given, and worst case scenario during the well fought FOO battle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
Some may have noticed some 4x4 tracks in the Otero area a couple of weeks back. Those are some guys doing a impact study. They are checking soil samples , checking for explosives and surveying each grid out there. Could something be finally happening? They told me what we already knew. No explosives found in the Otero - David area.
 

·
High Alpine Adventure
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
Well said.

The amount of land the DOE would have to concede on the west ridge, to connect the upper Otero waterfall and Otero Canyon, is trivial. Recovering that slice of trail was a given, and worst case scenario during the well fought FOO battle.
And have we all lost track of the fact that they agreed to hand back 25% of what they took in withdrawl (including the Top of Otero and the connection to Rambo) within 3 years.

It's been over three years since they made that commitment, so wazzup with that Kerry? :madmax:
 

·
Dirty nerotic bike whore
Joined
·
231 Posts
I have been on rides on government land numerous times. To do my citizen duty of checking for terrorist cells. We have all got to do our part and realize they want us to make sure its safe out there : D On a serious note, its been 3 years since I rode Otero/Cedro peak area... what has changed?
 
1 - 20 of 35 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