Mountain Bike Problem in the Irvine Open Space Preserve Again

You made several mentions of MTBers being in the minority or being a small community and I just don't think that is so. Do you have any statistics to support that statement?

However I do agree that just like snowboarding it is a $$ issue. The problem is that this particular issue (access) will never be solved with $ because nobody is paying much to ride, unlike the large resort operators running the mountain resorts. BTW, I no longer snowboard due to the excessive cost: $87.00 for a 1 day list ticket!!

Also, you mention not looking at a gift horse in the mouth, but the reason you look at a horse's mouth is to gauge its health. It is worth taking on a sick horse just to say you have one?

Private property is private property. Keep it private and do what you want with it, but don't do some pseudo-public I'm doing it for the public good but got a whole lot of tax or other consideration thing and then not expect the public to have a say.

I'm already concerned about the terms of the Blackstar deal. Know why? Because they are secret.

 

Mr. Vespa,

Your mentioned that your wife is a teacher. (Probably one of those teachers who grades an essay based on how long it is.)

How would the parents react if she told her class "if kids who might not even be in this school put graffiti on the playground at night then you won't be allowed to play on the swings during recess?"

Our response would be: "Mrs. Vespa, that isn't fair. You should make some effort to catch the bad kids. If you don't want to catch the bad kids you shouldn't punish us. The playground is not private property. It is owned by our government and maintained with our tax dollars."

Your response would be: "Children, you shouldn't complain. You can still use the slide and the basketball court, until someone at night vandalizes those."

 

1) The land was donated in exchange for allowing other parcels to be developed.

2) My complaint is that they are discriminating against mountain bikers by punishing us for "poaching" while other user groups do it with impunity.

3) Also, they created their bloated, impotent "watchdog" (a real dog), and I don't want public funds to be wasted supporting it.

 

Mr. Vespa, if you are that convinced that corporate landowners and developers are benevolent entities worthy of blind gratitude, and that those who expresses interest here on the issue of wilderness management are disrespectful and have intent to break the law, then perhaps you are on the wrong forum. As a responsible mountain biker, I prefer to not be talked down to that way.

 

When Irvine Ranch owned the property they had no problem enforcing the rules. Their security patrols were all over the place and when they caught someone the held them until the Sheriff came. There where times when Irvine Company had the Sheriff helicopter respond.

Comparing OC to NYC is not a good comparison, this is the West with relative wide open spaces. For every example of thing going wrong in a area I can counter with cities that are doing things right by the MTB community.

Dean

 

Those bratty colonists who staged the Boston tea party... they should have just followed the rules because wrong is wrong.

And now look at us.

 

Vespa -whoever you are- we really don't even know where to start with responding to your well-meaning though extremely misguided views on this matter.

For starters, as Waldo stated, miss us all with the condescension. I, for one, am 48 years old, was born in this state, and have lived here my entire life. I've seen the changes wrought on California both by big business and -even worse- by big government. In addition, I hurt all over in ways you'll never know enough to understand... do not talk down to me and others here about matters for which you so apparently lack perspective.

I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain my views on this topic, as i've done so previously, and others here have done so as well (and in a manner far more articulate than my own). The bottom line is that -generally speaking- a status quo exists in this area and has for many years, also, aside from Irvine locals, most of the MTB community really don't GAF about IRC land. There are FAR too many better places to ride nearby to put up with their disingenuous bullsh*t.

So, marching lock-step with the rules is your idea of "thinking for yourself"? :?:

Nice. :wave:

 

Wow you wife is a teacher then how come she didn't teach you any sense, history and how to read?

There are so many people here that participating in civil debate with real information and historical background. Then comes your benevolent jackass.

I would really appreciate it if you can simply delete your account and never visit this website ever again! Please take your holier than thou F'n bullsh!t to which ever holy church you belong to and sing kumbaya with all your 13 virgins in heaven!

 

Private property rights are all well and good. And we can discuss land transfers and development rights all we want.
My big point is that the Bommer Canyon area (at least a good portion of it) is actaully pubilically owned land. It is now (has been for awhile) owned by the City of Irvine and their policies keep the public out of publically owned land.

 

You all may not have seen this......but it was sent out a last week to the Warrior's Society:






FOLLOW-UP ON ACCESS ISSUES RELATED TO THE CITY OF IRVINE OPEN SPACE

The City takes the preservation of threatened resources very seriously. The
illegal access issues are serious all over and the City chooses to take a stand
with their property, they are going to follow the regulations outlined in the
NCCP/HCP and believe the habitat values should come before the user groups.

To put things into perspective:

Here is an unauthorized access sampling for a two month period in a 3,000 acre
area in the north Irvine Ranch. Three cameras on authorized trails, two cameras
on illegal trails and restoration sites cross referenced with in ground trail
counters.

(Just so you are aware, these statistics are not for the City of Irvine's land.
I am concerned at mass publishing "hunting", it may freak people out. Maybe we
just call it "Other Illegal Activities")

Unauthorized Recreational Access on legal trails and roads with 266 hits on our
equipment:

51.9% Mountain Bikers
21.4% Trail Runners
15.8% Hikers
4.5% Dog Walkers
2.2% Other Illegal Activity (Hunting, etc.) 1.9% Dirt Bikes 1.1% Equestrians
0.8% Paint Ballers 0.4% Vehicles

Unauthorized Night Access with lights and night equipment on legal trails and
roads with 266 hits on our equipment:

78.3% Mountain Bikers
4.3% Trail Runners
0% Hikers
8.7% Dog Walkers
8.7% Other Illegal Activity (Hunting, etc.) 0% Dirt Bikes 0% Equestrians 0%
Paint Ballers 0% Vehicles

Off Trail Use of Posted Closed Areas - Illegal Trail and Restoration Sites with
266 hits on our equipment:

79.4% Mountain Bikers
8.8% Trail Runners
0% Hikers
11.8% Dog Walkers
0% Other Illegal Activity (Hunting, etc.) 0% Dirt Bikes 0% Equestrians 0%
Paint Ballers 0% Vehicles

This is the statistics from one area that is more patrolled and managed than
most of the others. The numbers at Crystal Cove, Laguna Coast, Santiago Oaks,
Whitings, etc. have to be exponentially higher.

The problem is seriously out of control and no one within the bike community is
willing to take a stand for fear of being publicly punished. I know the names
of several of these people in the pictures. If change is to occur it needs to
come from within the bike community.

 

Let's get the "Jump to Conclusions" mat out.

#-o

Information helps everyone. Give us stats for those other areas or (honestly) pipe down. If there aren't supporting statistics, don't assume.

 

Irrespective of the stats, civil disobedience has been and is a valid form of expression that the policies being imposed by a governmental (pseudo-governmental entity in this case) entity are unacceptable to the community.

While there may be better forums to express dissatisfaction over the policies, one cannot deny that mountain bikers have expressed their opinion of the IRC policies in a loud and "vocal" manner in this case.

Not that I am advocating civil disobedience here, but I for one wouldn't even be aware of the issue with the space without the alleged poachers taking their rides. Nor would we be having this discussion.

If the city of Irvine wants to take a stand, then start giving out some tickets. In our free society, the best way to modify behavior is via the pocketbook. Pleading for altruism from the mountain biking community at large (especially coming from people who ostensibly have access whenever they feel like it) is likely to fall on deaf ears to a large percentage of us, even if we don't actually do the poaching.

 

266 encroachments in a 2 month period = 133 per month.
51.9% of 133 = 69 (number of mtb encroachment per month in 1st grouping).
69 divided by 30.4 ( average days in a month) = 2.27.

2.27 mtb encroachments per day in a 3,000 acre area seems like a relatively small number, based on the total number of mtb rides per day in Orange County.

Based on my OC trail experience, mountain biking is currently the number one method of visiting trails in non-wilderness areas. If this is true, it would follow that the number of mtb encroachments would be greater than that of other user groups.

Mountain bikers would also be more likely to use night lights than hikers and trail runners, which could also skew the survey.

The IRC, and other open space areas, rely on an intellectual understanding with the public that entrance to the areas will cause damage to the habitat. But given that the areas are in plain sight, and much of the access is on graded dirt roads, 100% compliance would seem to be an unreasonable expectation.

If a bank were left unlocked and unattended, with the vault open and the counters piled with cash, would it really be that great a surprise if some people walked in and helped themselves? Even if there was a "Closed" sign on the door?

 

Thanks for doing the math Kioti - that makes a great point. I'll add that equestrians, hunters, hikers, etc. could all travel at lower speeds and more easily go off-trail than bikers, so it would be easier for the cameras to miss them.

Here's where IRC's approach really breaks down for me:
"...no one within the bike community is willing to take a stand for fear of being publicly punished. I know the names of several of these people in the pictures. If change is to occur it needs to come from within the bike community."

#1 - Don't assume that we are all law-breakers. And despite your prejudice, many are willing to take a stand on important issues and do so regularly.

#2 - Understand that mountain bikers are a large and diverse user group. STR is a place to chat and some of us occasionally ride together, but outside of a few small clubs but it's not like we hold monthly meetings.

#3 - If you know the offenders' identities, then cite them! If you're going to make a rule, the you have the obligation to enforce it directly and fairly. IRC's approach is like randomly handing out speeding tickets on the 405 on-ramp because somebody drove too fast last week....or worse, they are expecting other drivers to give out the tickets. Ridiculous!

 

Talk about a Bias sampling

your aggregating the observations of 5 separate locations with 3 different conditions and saying this is representational of your sampling? Thats like saying oh there were 5 murders in City X so the entire city of X is unsafe.

Um i may have only gotten a B in stats but until your 5 separate samples are compared to one another using a magnitude of scale analysis your claiming a false result.

This is just another case of what the IRC, and OCTA have been doing for years. Then know the end result they want and deliberately manipulate the means in order to reach that redesignated end.

If you think about it the resources being restored in the OC NCCPs is only a faction of the overall resources that has been made decimated by development in OC.

 

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Mark Twain made this saying popular and it is appropos to this situation.

When you take numbers like these:

51.9% Mountain Bikers
21.4% Trail Runners
15.8% Hikers
4.5% Dog Walkers It makes MTBers look so much worse that the others, but why separate Trail Runners from Hikers? That combined number would be 37.2% and if you add in Dog Walkers then you are at 41.7%. Seems that these are all pedestrian activities to me.

Also, with a sample so small the margin of error is 7% or so which brings pedestrians and MTBers closer to equal. I want to see what % of Single speeders are poaching! We are generally law abiding (except for drinking beer in public spaces) and as such we should be granted the right to ride these places.:bang:

 

GREAT points Hoover!
:clap:

 

Mr. Vespa, just a suggestion, you might want to take the old saying " 'Tis better to be silent and thought a fool... " to heart.

Then again, maybe not.

 

Ah yes, Irvine is SO concerned about "preservation of natural resources" alright. So concerned, that they only sell it to developers for the highest prices.

I'd be very curious to see the actual document this information is culled from. It sounds more like a missive from an individual than from a city. Who's name was on that letter?

 

Hey.......don't shoot the messenger......just passing along some info that was passed through us...we neither confirm nor deny any of the info above.

:?: