Mountain Bike Problem in the Irvine Open Space Preserve Again

WOAH!!!! Holy over moderation! Where did those posts go???

 

Big Brother took the funny away.....:-k



shitty

 

let the rainy week madness begin...

 

You're not a newb here and know the deal on posting illegal trails.

I agree though that it perfectly illustrates how ridiculous the "environmental regulations" are.

A pic with just the toll road would still be up...

 

Rachel nails it.

Question: Could the practice of taking random quotes from an open forum like this and using them against the greater mountain bike community be considered a form of eavesdropping? Sounds almost like 'selective, intellectual poaching' to me. I personally like reading a wide spectrum of ideas and reactions, from 'knee jerk' to 'well-thought out,' and seeing how they inform and guide my own thoughts. Its like a think tank where even the most contradictory statements can lead to a fuller understanding of a topic, and imaginative solutions to long-standing problems.

As a Forest Service volunteer, I was allowed to work in the closed area after the Santiago Fire. One of the things that impressed me was the amazing amount of compliance to the closure. There was very little poaching by mountain bikers. And when word got that I was working on the Santiago Truck Trail and the Luge, it was mountain bikers who stepped up to help me prepare those trails for re-opening.

Now that I've been a trail volunteer for two years, I've seen countless occasions where mountain bikers were 'the only ones' who came out to repair landslides, clear downed trees and brush, and generally maintain trails in the National Forest and County Parks. Most times it comes down to SHARE or the Warrior Society. I can't even begin to think of the condition our trails would be in without all this work from the MTB community, or how many hours were spent in these volunteer pursuits.

Do mountain bikers ride where they're not supposed to? Sure, a few do. Should the entire community be made to suffer because of the actions of a few? That would be a great injustice.

Any management organization that doesn't understand that there are always going to be people that disagree with its policies, and will even act against its wishes, doesn't understand human nature. But the wise ones will take conflict in stride, and continue working toward the greater good-- in this case, the opening of these public lands to the vast number of deserving, responsible users.

 

I have been waiting a few years myself... Like Disco said in a previous post, I live about 10 minutes riding time from those cameras, yet I have to get in my car and drive 20 min. to the closest trailhead. Very frustrating...

 

Uh... exactly how large is the "Equestrian Community" we are speaking of? What concrete actions did they actually take? In the end how many named individuals were censored exactly? What was the result of this alleged police action?

 

I agree the Irvine Ranch needs "restoration", so until it's restored to a place I would want to go, I won't. But I would would appreciate that the people of the Island Republic of Irvine stay home, because as with any disease, it can spread, and they would be damaging my "sensitive" habitat.

 

Can we ALL just boycott Irvine and the Irvine company? Maybe we can make jerseys with the Irvine company logo crossed out? Not spend money in that shitty (city)? Not shop at fashion island ( Does that company still own that place?)
I don't think it'll matter much....But still, why pay the people who screw you?

 

Does anyone know who funds the conservancy? I think the irvine company is providing for them, but would hate to think that any of our money went to support that egotistical, useless organization.

 

http://www.ocweekly.com/2009-11-05/news/don-bren-land-gift-irvine-ranch-conservancy/

 

My understanding is the Irvine Conservancy is under a contract by the City of Irvine to manage the Irvine Open Space property. So funding is tax money, grants, and donations. I am sure they have other sources of funding for other properties.

Dean

 

Wow, I now have less than 0 respect for this so called "consevancy". Just another scam by a billionaire to get more wellfare money. So it's nothing more than some rich guy's back yard and he wants us to stay out of it and pay him for the privalige. Ya know those trails are still on the map up at Ridge Park like their ridable.

 

Wow.
Once again: follow the money... it will usually tell the whole story.

Why not just eradicate the worthless and overfed IRC, let the county manage the land (loosely), allow open access to all, and have trailwork done by volunteers?

 

Situation is frustrating but I would prefer managed "Open Space" over another Ladera Ranch any day.

 

I believe in both preservation, and access. I also know that there can be a fine line between use and abuse.

Maybe I feel that Man has an inherent need to commune with Nature, because we ARE a part of Nature. I certainly would like to see more open access in undeveloped areas, if we can do it without destroying the area we're out there to enjoy.

One thing I'd really like to see is the creation of more trails (singletrack) in Orange County. I went on a docent-led ride in the IRC, and we spent the entire time on graded dirt roads. It was frustrating because I'd heard so many great things about the area, but never really felt a part of it.

Don't get me wrong, I love Black Star, the Main Divide, Harding, etc. But I sincerely hope the creation of trails like Holy Jim, upper Joplin, the Luge and San Juan are a part of the future for the IRC.

 

But he has used it well: to win the nation’s largest conservation tax breaks, to gain permits to slice and dice coastal plains into tract homes, and to win PR points for the natural wonders he has “given” and “preserved” and “set aside".


“I’m all in favor of public access and public control,” says Sefton. “Private entities, they generally have a goal . . . usually having to do with their own economic well-being, and that may not always be aligned with what’s best for the public.”

O’Connell, who is currently paid $280,000 in salary and benefits by Bren,

Records show Irvine paid less than $300,000 annually to city staff to manage open space before the conservancy took over. Now, taxpayers there are on the hook for $733,000 per year to IRC, plus costs for police security once provided by private Irvine Ranch patrols.


Think that summed it up pretty well.:wave:

JamesR if you are not well paid for all your propaganda/mis-information here then you are either a fool or a "Hitlar's youth" for the Irvine Company.:-k

 

Did I read that article correctly?

The land that the IRC wants to donate is in such disrepair that it needs restoration to the tune of $2M of taxpayer money per year for 10 years. Yet they hold themselves up as expert stewards of the public lands? And they say that Young and Bren have no influence or interest in pursuit of tax money, but are they not on the board of IRC? Seems a bit incongruous.

And then there was this part, which speaks directly to a whole bunch of questions in this thread:
"Records show Irvine paid less than $300,000 annually to city staff to manage open space before the conservancy took over. Now, taxpayers there are on the hook for $733,000 per year to IRC, plus costs for police security once provided by private Irvine Ranch patrols. O’Connell defended his organization’s work in Irvine, saying they had tripled guided tours, developed trails and done habitat restoration."

I don't have nearly enough info to condemn the IRC or to judge whether there is anyone out there who would do it better, but there sure seems to be room for a vigorous debate.

 

I warned people not to look behind the curtain.

Dean

 

*hulk rage growing*