Mountain Bike Problem in the Irvine Open Space Preserve Again

OK, so who EXACTLY are "trail user groups" ?? Wouldn't that now be the poachers? My point is that I believe that IRC are not those, we am those.

So, these are intended to be a punitive measure?
I guess it really shows those poachers to close the area to the rest of us huh?

I beg to differ. It only says "shall provide grounds for" , not "is required to"

IRC simply need to call the local authorities upon each observed infraction and then let the POPO do their work. If they choose not to enforce the will of IRC's trespass complaint then so be it.

The IRC policy doesn't make any sense if they really want to stop the poaching.

IMHO, about all they have accomplished is to chase off the responsible MTB set.

They have enough $$ and political will that certainly they should be able to get the police to cite, or maybe this is just a tempest in a teapot??

 

I don’t have much time to comment in length…….
I hate to see what you'll write if you do have time.#-o

The land cannot be built on, so no….there will not be homes and a Walmart here.
That's not the first time I've heard that before about land "reserve", I was born the day BEFORE yesterday. But the "land reserve" has worked wonders for those who give a lot of money to the city/county officials.

 

I am confused. Is riding there illegal or not?

I did a quick check of the penal code section 602 (trespass), but can't see any provision making it a trespass to be on public lands with a bike. But I didn't search the Land Use Statute exhaustively -- if anybody has any information with respect to the legality of access to these lands, I would be interested to have reference to a statute or ordinance on the same.

It troubles me that we are accusing people of poaching where it isn't even clear there is a trespass. Having a gate up saying stay out isn't enough. If there isn't a statute or ordinance prohibiting access and the only reason for lack of access is a gate and a group of people who think access should be limited, then I don't see how these alleged poachers are doing anything illegal on public lands. But maybe this is just the lawyer in me speaking out.

Near as I can tell from this discussion, the city wants to manage access (presumably as cited by JamR to protect the environment), but the IRC has no right to issue citations. It seems to me if the city was serious about enforcement, they would budget for rangers and empower the issuance of citations to offenders. But if it isn't illegal in the first place, no citations could be issued.

As a policy issue, if the real issue is environmental protection, the city might want to consider allowing more bike access. People tend to be a lot more conscious about cutting into a marked protected area when there are people on the trail to see them as opposed to when they are all by themselves or running from rangers.

 

Update:

I looked at the Irvine city ordinances which appears to address the issue:
http://library2.municode.com/default-test/home.htm?infobase=10941&doc_action=whatsnew

Sec. 3-4-131. Trail, trespassing and closed areas. (a) Designation and use. The Director of Community Services may designate operations for horseback riding, bicycle riding, hiking trails, trailheads and restrooms in the open space area. The Director of Community Services may also designate closed areas where entry is prohibited in the interest of public convenience or safety or for the preservation and protection of natural or cultural resources. No person may leave a designated trail in any open space area on foot, bicycle, horseback or otherwise other than at designated entry or exit points, except for law enforcement, lifesaving or emergency purposes or for open space area management. No person shall enter on foot, bicycle, horseback or otherwise any open space area or any trail or road that the Director of Community Services has authorized be posted as a closed area.

(b) Gates. No person shall unlock or otherwise open a locked gate without advance permission from the City or its authorized agents. No person opening a closed gate shall proceed beyond said gate without first closing it.

(c) Closure. The Director of Community Services may close an open space area and facilities and portions thereof when such areas and facilities are filled to capacity, when use of such areas and facilities will adversely impact sensitive species and habitat or when a hazardous condition poses potential danger to citizens, City employees or City property.

(d) Right-of-way. All persons shall observe posted right-of-way restrictions on any trail, path, walkway, parking lot or road owned, operated or managed by the City. This requirement shall also apply to any "trail courtesy" right-of-way regulations for multiple-use trails as may be promulgated by the Director of Community Services.

(Ord. No. 07-20, § 1, 12-11-07)

Sec. 3-4-139. Violations. Any first violation of this division shall constitute and be punishable as an infraction. Any second subsequent violation shall constitute and be punishable as a misdemeanor.

(Ord. No. 07-20, § 1, 12-11-07)

Sec. 4-13-202. Infraction penalty. Every violation determined to be an infraction is punishable by:

A. A fine not exceeding $100 for a first violation;

B. A fine not exceeding $200 for a second violation of the same provision within one year;

C. A fine not exceeding $500 for each additional violation of the same provision within one year.

(Ord. No. 96-12, § 3(IV.K-202), 7-9-96)


The city is authorized to make rules regarding closure and bikes. And it looks like they may issue you a citation (for an infraction). I stand corrected. Poach at your own risk.

 

I've done plenty of hikes and bike ride w/ the IRC and they are awesome people that truely want to protect the land. In fact, i was going to volunteer to be a docent but releized that i didn't have to time.

Anyways, the picture are indeed from a motion detector camera. These camera's aren't intended to capture people who trespass, they are there to monitor animal activities.

What people are forgetting is that the land is private. They dont belong to the people. The fact that they open it up every now and then and litterially INVITE us onto their land is a blessing! Let's not abuse this!!!!

 

Is it legal to post pictures of these folks on a public internet sight? They are not convicted sex-offenders, or convicted anything. If anything happened to any of these riders and it was determined that action was taken against them because someone saw their pic on the web, I can image IRC will be looking at a hefty lawsuit.

 

Hey Minh

Not sure where you got your info from but plenty of people have commented on this subject and the land belong to city of irvine which means public land. They are just managing it because they "$some how$" got the permission to build 241 through it. Now they got the right to "manage" it as open land "reserve".

Seriously, why would they build a freeway from middle of OC to middle of orange? Just like the good old days of rail road building.......just a shameless land grab. By managing it they can make sure no one else has the right to build on it.

No private land owner in their right mind would allow public access of any kind due to liability and possibility of loosing the land to public use. When is the last time Irvine Company let you step a foot on their land without leasing from them first?

 

Dean is right. Forego those trails and ride elsewhere. Hard to beat horses and hikers. Queston, which of the three groups, horse riders, hikers or mountain bikers have a great financial impact? Given the trends of the last 10 to 15 years, I believe it is clear horse riders are dead last. Most likely mountain bikers are first because of their numbers and the cost of their bikes, related equipment and other consumable goods. This raises the question of whether trails that are designated horses & hikers only should be open to mountain biking (with due consideration to the safety of all trail users) given the economic impact of mountain biking.

 

I'm definitely no legal expert but the pics were posted because the riders were on trails not open to the public on the date and time stamped on the image. Pretty clear-cut that they were doing something that the land manager deemed unacceptable, thus the outreach to the biking community. Getting caught in the act is a tough one to beat but photos of such are a close second.

 

Irvine Co trails suck anyways, stop your crying.

 

Bzzzt - wrong answer but thanks for playing. It is public land that IRC is PAID to manage with your tax dollars. How gracious of them to let us enjoy our land

 

I kinda read through all of this. What I got from this is we need to go hiking running and take some horses there so we dont look as bad.:lol:

 

^^^ hey- maybe that's what the hikers and equestrians were doing--posing as mountain bikers, trying to make us look bad. i thought something looked a little funny about most of those dudes (c'mon- a ponytail + lycra = hippie hiker).

:cheers:

 

Note, the above does not state to ban one user group and not others.

Are you being docent led only on alternate Wednesdays at an arbitrary time? Or do you get special access?

There seems to be a trespassing problem on Irvine City owned land managed by an outside contractor. Certainly, the city can have city employees ( ie nit pickin' Irvine Cops) respond to trespass on their property when their contractor asks for assistance. Those city employees certainly have authority to cite! There's even revenue in it. I know how to improve the Irvine City budget.

Punishing rule abiding users is not going to stop those who won't follow the rules; it just fuels more resentment for what many perceive is a pretty arbitrary and biased system/management. The I-5 analogy was a good one, I think.

 

Great idea Mark! We all should go rent some horses and feed it a shiat load of carrots so it can shiat all over that damn place.......wait think they already do that.:lol:

 

The reality here is- that the land in not for biking use right now... you can like it, not like it.. whatever- but anyone who uses the land illegally is making the rest of us look bad, which equals bad for biking. period.
while I agree that it is bogus that other users (read: hikers & equestrians) get to use the land, and it isn't fair. The fact is that bikers get the blame- if it is fair and honest may or may not be the case. but it is reality.
If we want more access to things we need to be MORE responsible than the other users, and as much as we don't like it- that is a fact.

Bottom line for me is- I will continue to go to the parks and places where biking encouraged (even if I have to pay a fee), I will tread lightly, pack out my trash, yield to other users- in general, be the better person, just so I am not one of the people that screw up biking. Hopefully through actions like that these companies and groups will see that we are an asset to them, that we will pay a small fee to use good trails, and take care of the land... making us a group they want there. that is how we fight this- and win.

 

if theres one thing i know....

 

Agreed!
I just can't believe this thread is 4 pages deep to poach some fire roads....really??

 

^^^ there is also some fun challenging s/t out there--made by mountain bikers. and it's a beautiful area to ride in, even if you just stay on the fireroads.

compare/contrast this situation to how laguna coast (their neighbor) has handled mountain biking.

although lcwp has also had it's share of poaching, they have never banned or singled out mtbers as a problem group. they have warned people that have been caught poaching, tried to educate people about proper usage, and have welcomed mtbers into their park. as a result they now have an active bike patrol (tav's), monthly rides, and volunteers (many who are mtn bikers) doing trail maintenance, leading rides, and taking an active role in the park. and it's a similar situation in el moro state park (witness the recent ticketron work).

at this point, irvine south isn't making many friends in our community--and maybe that's their goal--but in the long run it makes them look like elitists with their collective head in the sand.

 

Not at all. Once you walk out of your home you are in the public domain and your picture can be taken by anyone who wants to - and they don't need your release.

Especially when you are caught in the act of trespassing on private property!

It can also be posted as they wish as long as it isn't for commercial use, slander, or other similar misuse.

It's also legal when used it to inform or educate.

The exception would be if the person was a minor and/or the picture would reveal private information.