The Warrior's Society will not be doing patrols of any kind..Chris misprinted that in his weekly news ..what he meant was he was trying to get the Forestry Service to allow all organizations interested in leading guided tours to be allowed back in the forest(hiking, biking, horsey, etc.). No word from the Forestry Service about that as of yet. I will keep you posted. Then every can go in a rant about that topic if it happens. I forwarded it to the WS council..thanks..much more viable then loops at Fully.
1) not a environmental expert but not sure forest should be closed for as long as they suggest 2) do find it totally hypocritical to allow Ws to continue event "jsut because" they already had permit...does tht make it less damagin to the land 3) also suggest a bit hypocritical as well tht WS wants to keep event in place as well as trainging days as I believe they suggest mission it to protect the land (know a few really cool WS peeps and fully aware of all the great stuff they have done over the years but this seems to go again the grain imo)
I really can't chose one side or the other on this topic. I respect the work and achievements of WS and feel that I have personally benefited from their efforts. Furthermore, I realize that they will contribute to the to recovery of this area and more specifically will contribute to the repair of trails that have been effected. On the other hand, if the area is closed because use or overuse could tilt it's fragile state, then it really should be closed to all. I have a feeling that the area doesn't need to be closed. If that is the case, then I really have no problem with the event going on as planned. That is if the event is routed around any sensitive areas. To Maxwell, CPATCRASH, DISCO and the many others that have put in their time working to repair and maintain trails: First off, thank you. Secondly, I feel your bit*h is legitimate and more than simply valid. I can certainly see why Pat has such strong feelings about this and I feel that I should have his back. Now you can see my dilema... If you need me, I'll be sitting here on the fence.
I wasn't really just asking about that. More asking about these "patrols" in general. I see them at Chino, AW and other areas. I view them as rent O cops kinda.
just for the record I believe that the Warriors Society is good for all of us. I think that the powow is good for all of us. I really like the folks I know who are in the WS. I think that for the most part, the trail closures in the Santa Anas are lame. I also am a big fan of Pat and Crash, and most of you on both sides of this argument. Have fun.
I have to believe that if the Forestry Service says it's ok for the WS to run the event then they know that the riders are not going to damage anything. Considering how overkill the closure is with regard to closing trails where the fire didn't even hit they are obviously being cautious. I know they didn't allow the Rowanda Ride (which had a permit as well) to go up Harding because it is thru a damaged area. I completely understand that. I think the closure being as large as it is may be extreme, I can understand closing Motorway because of danger, Harding and Modjeska because of sensitivity to the burned areas but the stretch up Maple and the main divide from Beeks over to Joplin just doesn't make sense...I can only hope that with enough people complaining to them they might reconsider keeping such a large part closed... It bugs me to hear riders are riding up to the Luge because that just gives the Forestry Service ammo as to why they are closing it all..... Just because we can see where the fire hit from the Main Divide across the hillsides doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed on the unburned areas...I can see where the fires hit at Santiago Oaks from my house does that mean all the surrounding trails should be closed? It just doesn't make sense!:?:
I think the closure is overkill as well. As I said before. Open the forest for all, not a select few.
Having done the "Trail Patrol" at El Moro, I can tell you a few things.... First, it is not about slapping the wrists of those breaking the rules. While you do attempt to educate riders that are breaking the rules, you cannot ticket them. The hope is that they are breaking rules they are not aware of and with education will stop (such as poaching trails). If you have any questions as to the repercussions of poaching trails, please see the other can o worms thread. Second, it is for trail assistance. John and I would always carry an extra water bottle, and more than 50% of the time found need to give it out to someone (mostly hikers and joggers, as well as a few newbie riders). We also carried maps, and would assist with directions. I can assure you that our rides were, by no means, average, fun, work-out type rides (though we did still get to enjoy the trails, our focus was not on ourselves, but on others); we would ask each and every person on the trail if they were okay or needed assistance. Third, it really helps the image of mtn bikers by volunteering and assisting ALL trail users. Though they can still biatch about some, they can't really complain about mtn bikers giving out assistance. Fourth, we would have all the numbers to the rangers, sheriff, etc if needed, and would give a report to the ranger on hand at the end of each patrol, noting any unusual occurrences (wildlife, lost riders/hikers, illegal trail use, etc). There is more to it, but I'm at work and have limited typing time (plus, I already know most of you aren't reading any more)
i think you're wrong here- these "can-o-worms" posts are worth keeping around- it's not like we could have a conversation like this on some of the other MTB boreds (yes, spelled correctly) without flames, trolls and other crap thrown into the mix that's not related.
Ken R. asked me to help patrol Whiting because I ride and live close by. I only got to do 1 patrol before it all burned and you're right, it does give a positive image about mtnbikers when other users see that mtnbikers are there to assist and not just riding. Plus, it's a great way to meet girls.
Per the OC Register: Santiago fire Burned Area Emergency Response report makes several recommendations Among the recommendations made: Close public open space for two years and install early warning system. By SALVADOR HERNANDEZ People, property, water quality, wildlife and infrastructure once threatened by the flames of the Santiago fire are now at risk of floods and landslides caused by rain, according to a Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) report released by the state today. All areas near the 28,464-acre burned area are at risk, but the risk is the greatest in Modjeska, Williams and the upper reaches of Silverado Canyon, according to the report. Some of the recommendations to mitigate the effects of the fire include these: •Road drainage systems should be inspected •Evacuation routes should be established and cleared of dangerous vegetation •Public open space should be closed for up two years. •An early warning system should be established in case of possible flooding. The report, by a team of state and county agencies, comes 12 days after the Santiago fire, which authorities believe was intentionally set along Santiago Road Oct. 21, was contained by firefighters. About 50 firefighters from the US Forest Service continue to monitor 24 hours a day, said Jay Bertek, incident commander with the Forest Service. Firefighters have not found a hot spot in two days, but with high Santa Ana winds and low humidity levels expected Wednesday, fire officials are waiting to declare the fire completely under control, Bertek said. Federal and state officials began their inspection of the Santiago fire Nov. 1, days before the fire was completely contained. A federal team was assigned to investigate and make recommendations on the burned areas in the Cleveland National Forest, while an interagency team of state agencies examined the burned area outside the forest. The teams were composed of experts in water flow, soil, geology, botany, engineering, archeology and computer mapping. According to the report, the worst damage occurred in the upper portions of Santiago Canyon, Bear Trap Canyon, Harding Canyon, Williams Canyon, Arroyo Trabuco, Pine Canyon and Halfway Canyon. In these areas, hydrophobic soil is believed to have developed. It is dirt that has become mostly repellant to water because a waxy material released by burned brush covers the land and prevents water from penetrating, making it unstable and dry. Because of this, residents in the area are susceptible to flooding and debris flow, depending on how much rain falls.
interesting stuff schecky. there was something on the news about landslides this morning. from what i understand, Harding already has a landslide or two on it? "open space closed for two years" hurts.
Your official new name is Charlie of Charlie's Angels...no more Trail Angels...it's Charlie's Angels!!!!
I guess the only answer here, is that if the WS won't patrol themselves and move their event, we as a community, must ask that event not be held there by calling the Forest Service. Self policing is what we've been talking about for years, including groups like the WS, so now is the time we do it truly. Keith Fletcher, District Ranger 1147 East Sixth Street Corona, CA 92879 (951) 736-1811 Fax - (951) 736-3002 Send Mail to: Cleveland National Forest 10845 Rancho Bernardo Rd. Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92127 (858) 673-6180 (Voice) (858) 673-6192 (Fax) 1-800-735-2922 (CRS) William Metz, Forest Supervisor (effective approx. 10/01/07) Forest Staff Officers (858) 674-2901 Gloria Silva, Resource & Planning Officer VACANT, Recreation & Lands Officer Steve Eastwood, Forest Engineer Debbie Rutherford, Administrative Officer Richard D. Hawkins, Fire and Aviation Officer VACANT, Public Affairs Officer Anebele Cornejo, Assistant Public Affairs Officer Miguel Martinez, Equal Employment Opportunity Manager Peggi Rodgers, Contracted Webmaster Or by email: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/cleveland/contact/feedback.shtml
