PV: The axe is falling.....

This post is exactly why this thread needs to be closed. How many push-back posts were caused by your original post? Now (possibily) months later you get to change you orginal comments to some thing less contentious. If people think this thread should be around for historical purposes then leave it as such, no changes allowed (aka closed). Don't try to rewrite sometime later to make "your" side (whatever that is) look less contentious. You have basically invalidated the contents of this thread as it is no longer has any historical integrity. You should make the case in a new thread.

 

Are you a mod? Lock it and start a new one. If not? PM a mod and get it locked and me banned too if ya like- frankly, I could not care less- don't spend a lot of time on line, even less won't matter a bit to me. You also obviously have issues with me personally, so it's prolly best they lock this and I move on.

P/s: Might wanna re-read my post and the point(s) I was emphasising.


-kevin.

 

Kevin, I have no issue with you what so ever. I have never met you but I believe that you and this thread are trying to serve a meaningful purpose to get some vital information out to trail users and advocates. The sheer size of this thread (in my opinion) is no longer serving that purpose as people have better things to do than sift through this entire tome. What they may do is read through some small portion and be left with only paritial and quite possibly out-of-date and inaccurate information. Even if you add a new post to this thread with the lastest and greatest information users most likely will not see it.

I believe this trail system and the advocacy that is trying to be accomplished there would be better served with new thread that contains accurate and up-to-date information with a brief synopsis of the efforts to date. This will give the viewers of STR and good understanding of what is going on there and maybe they will lend a helping hand. Which is what I believe was the orginal intent of this thread in the first place.

Once again, I have no issue with you. Anyone who is for good trails and is willing to put some advocacy efforts towards that is good in my book. I just hate to see your efforts not getting the proper publicity on STR due to a bloated thread.

 

Check out the updated map at socaldirt.org. From my point of view, the best option that these teams will have for mid-week training is Del Cerro. Does anyone think the decision-makers have a special place in their heart for high school racing teams?

 

I asked Troy to start a new thread with updates but anyone who wants I'm sure can get it started. Good idea. I was glad to see South High added to that map (socaldirt.org) my niece goes there Del Cerro would be perfect to train on. A few of us including my niece and nephew will be there late Sunday if anyone else goes say hi.
And there is still hope for more bike access it's open for review in the future by the City Council. Stay positive....(Burma is the main fireroad)

 

Socaldirt.org looks very cool. Most people have a soft spot for encouraging youth athletics and the existing network of trails at Del Cerro have great potential not only for mid-week training, but also for races! There's ways to put together a few different types of 6-8 mile loop configurations, that would be great for racing. Encouraging high-school cycling benefits every mountain biker.

I raced with a collegiate team for a few years at Box Springs park in Riverside and that place is a alot more limited compared to Del Cerro.

As far as training goes, you're good to go, just get a hold of a map and plan some route(s).

city approved trail maps are at this link http://mtbpv.org/

--I just noticed your user name. This gives me pause. If your looking to do downhill training, forget it. Those days are long gone.--

 

Given your history, I'll take advice from someone with a more respectable rep. I'll just advise you to keep it on pause. That's probably what you'll be doing anyway as I manual past you down your favorite singletrack. I ride street, freeride, DH, and XC. Label that!!!

That's good to hear. Tell your niece and nephew to keep an eye out for our first meeting. Or drop me a line and I can keep you in the know. It will be next week sometime. Brad [email protected]

 

Bummer

Sorry to have replied directly to you. I can't expect to relate to riders with mad skills like yourself. I should have known that anyone with freeride in their title would have intense skills that would put me to shame. You da man.

However, Socaldirt.org still seems pretty cool and Del Cerro is able to provide a good location for riding/training.

 

Let's just leave it at that to stay on topic. (and positive) Very much agree Del Cerro can be a huge asset to these teams. Here are some threads on the subject.

http://www.socaltrailriders.org/for...ool-mountian-bike-league-needs-your-help.html

http://www.socaltrailriders.org/for...onations-high-school-team-needed-sd-area.html

 

Brad is BY FAR one of the best riders that I have ever been around. You don't hold a candle to him. Here is an example~


You're right, you DON'T have his skills. You never will. You have no place talkin' smack like that. I know very few people that can ride better than him. He is a very unselfish person and quite humble. He would never boast about his skills.

Besides the fact that he has "intense skills" he is a very thoughtful and personable guy. I am very proud to be his friend and very insulted by your comments.

 

The resulting trail map at del cerro is essentially an over-reaction by the local hiker, equestrian, birdwatcher, and environmentalist communities to what they perceived as years of "abuse" of the land by bikers coupled to some extent with a snobish "locals only" attitude. The result was punitive toward bikers but hopefully, we will gain back some trail access eventually. It will be a long process however and don't ever expect the area to what it was. Unfortunately, I have not been able to participate in ongoing issues in PV due to work and other commitments, but there are people still fighting on. Offering support to those people will do much more good than pointing fingers at each other and trading insults on the interweb.

Infighting will get us no where. There is no doubt that demands and desires of gravity style riding presents challenges to publicly managed trail systems and that style of riding is not the most "compatible" with other user groups. There are issues with speed, erosion and the construction of unauthorized trail features. Hopefully our members of the "adrenaline factory" are cognizant that their behavior and trail ettiquete can have direct consequences on overall mtb access to public land. I hope that they are out there trying to set the example for other riders to follow on ther SSDH rides.

That being said, the XC set needs to recognize that the non-biking user groups do not make the distinction between xc rider, downhiller, dirt jumper, free rider, etc. To them we are all one and the same. Heck they probably even lump us in with the roadies that they curse at while driving to work too. The entire MTB community needs to work together to establish areas in so-cal where DH/FR/DJ/AM styles of riding are legit and legal. We need to recognize that the "adrenaline junkies" are a big part of our sport (and industry) and they need places to ride that suit their needs. Otherwise, what choice are they left with other than to poach trails and build unauthorized stunts which only futher the negative perceptions of bikers in general. (i.e. when bikes are banned from the trails, only outlaws will be riding mountian bikes). I find it hard to believe that in a metropolitian area the size of LA and OC counties that its not profitable for someone to be operating some sort of MTB park.

drc

 

Bummer to see what has happened to the old stomping grounds.

 

The Axe is Falling Summary

Why did this happen?
The trails we used to ride in Rancho Palos Verdes were all on private property. Even though they were in a landslide zone, developers were trying to build a golf course below Del Cerro Park. Although it stood only a small chance of happening, the city decided to buy the land and put an end to the threat of development. Since the land was too expensive for the city to buy alone, they searched for public funding.

Most of the money to buy the land was granted by state agencies whose goal is to preserve and restore native habitat. While this assured open space would not be taken by development, the city was obligated to implement policies that will protect and restore native plants and increase native animal populations. Habitat preservation now has priority over allowed uses.

Free for all is over.
The city has consequently developed a land management plan that regulates all activities within the preserve. This wasn’t done in secret; it was a grueling two-year public process that was open to everyone. The few in this forum who participated can be recognized by their calls to keep working to reopen trails. They understand the process and what’s at stake.

During the development of the trails plan, the city heard hundreds of comments, suggestions, and complaints from the public. Some very prominent and influential locals fervently opposed bikes. The council viewed formal presentations from organizations like the Sierra Club, Native Plant Society, Audubon Society, and local horseman’s associations, all of which wanted to severely restrict or exclude bikes from trails. CORBA PV and a few dedicated mountain bikers stood against these formidable adversaries.

What were the issues?
Habitat destruction by bikes was the biggest complaint. In the past 5-6 years the number of new trails exploded. While hikers made some, it was pretty obvious who made most of them, especially big drops, ladders, and jumps. Opponents pointed to this blight as the strongest reason to ban bikes, saying mountain bikers have no respect for the land and never will. We countered with; all of this was done before the city bought the land, and most people were uninformed about habitat issues. Let us show that once the plan is in place, bikers will only use existing designated trails.

User conflict was also a key issue. Emotional testimonials proved to be very persuasive to the council, especially when it came to horses. Equestrians, bolstered with historical entitlement, claimed there was a fundamental safety problem with bikes. Our argument was that bikes can coexist with horses if bikers observe trail etiquette guidelines. We offered to help educate bikers and work with other user groups. In addition, we pointed out that two city mandated public surveys indicated user conflict was actually low.

A compounding issue was the closure of redundant and unsustainable trails mandated by state resource agencies that put up the money. Naturalists were zealous about creating more contiguous open space for wildlife by eliminating many trails. We offered data showing that less than 2% of the land was taken by trails, so having some redundant trails would not significantly impact habitat. We also asked that trails be left open unless professionally trained biologists established specific environmental conflicts.

Win, lose, or draw?
Portuguese Bend was disappointing. Bikes were squeezed out by equestrians’ demands for trails without bikes and closure of half the existing trails. Many trails that could have offered alternative routes to separate bikes from horses were eliminated for habitat reasons. Lower Slalom is an example of this closure policy. On the other hand, Forrestal, Ocean Trails, Agua Armaga, and Three Sister reserves strike a reasonable balance for bikes. If you stop for a second and consider the combined forces opposing bikes, we were amazingly successful.

Is this the end?
We know the city is willing to reopen trails to bikes because they did it at Forrestal. Mountain bikers earned their trust by riding responsibly and volunteering for trail work. The city rewarded us by reopening a bunch of trails to bikes.

We have another chance at Portuguese Bend. The council will review the trails plan in six-months, sometime around February, and then annually. We’ve been challenged to show that the complaints against us can be overcome. We have to accept that we can’t have every trail we want. The way it stands, we can get some back or we can lose them all. In many respects we control our fate.


We have two simple options:

• Obey the new rules and convince decision makers to open more trails to bikes.
• Disobey the new rules and face a total bike ban from all trails.

I’ve committed over four years of my life to keep mountain bikes in PV. During that time I have probably spent more hours fighting for trail access than most people have spent riding trails here. I’m not bragging, I’m pleading for everyone to get on the same page. Don’t undo what’s been accomplished. Don’t sacrifice the future for a few minutes of pleasure or revenge. Don’t stand by and let others take this opportunity away from mountain bikers.

You can’t always get what you want but if try sometimes you just might find you get what you need.

 

Upper Filiorum

There was a meeting at Fred Hesse Park last night concerning the Upper Filiorum parcel and trail designation.
I was unable to make it to the meeting, but I was wondering if anybody here attended or knows what transpired?

I'm guessing all the sweet singletracks will become illegal for bikes...

 

I sent them an email.

Strangely, they didn't add it to their page of responses:

http://www.safetrails.net/bikers_respond.asp

What a mystery...

 

Filiorum success

The meeting was facilitated by the National Park Service with the RPV city parks and open space manager and land conservancy. About 30 people attended. We were split into three groups of about ten.

Twenty mountain bikers attended - THANK YOU!. There were also several Sierra Club hikers and hike leaders. All of whom supported bike access on all trails.

Using a map provided by the CORBA PV Steering Committee, we were all on the same page. The recommendation of all three worktable groups was bike access to all trails shown on the map we presented. Filiorum map

The city will take the input from the workshop and present a trails plan to the public for comment on Wednesday Sept 29th. At this point you can be assured that bike opponents will be there to demand changes. The city will make adjustments based on public input and send the plan to the city council for approval.

Even though we have a solid case for all multi-use trails we must have a large turnout for the Sept 29th workshop to prevent changes. Please rally everyone once more to make sure what we gained isn't taken away.

Check the mtbpv.org website for updates or add your name to the mailing list. The list is not shared with anyone and we keep alerts to a minimum.

We also have another opportunity to get more trails in Portuguese Bend when the city does a final review. A lot of people are still working hard to make it happen. We are optimistic that we'll be successful so please be ready to do whatever you can when it comes up.

 

20 mtbrs out of 30 sounds really good.

I'm sure you guys know the area really well, but I can't overemphasize how important Rattlesnake,
Kelvin, Cut Across, Jack's Hat, Lower Connector and especially East Fork are for MTB access. Those
trails are crucial for setting up great LEGAL rides out there.

I am really impressed there's still a strong effort dealing with this great local area.
Thank you.

 

All are on the list except Three Sisters Lower Connector. Unfortunately, it goes outside city property and is out of bounds so to speak. The only way to get access is an easement from the property owner. He's the one who put up the no trespassing signs so it may be tough to get him to agree.

The only other crossing into Three Sisters reserve is off of the Three Sisters East Fork (Matterhorn to us). It's a mess and will need a lot of work but it may be the only option. We proposed a new less steep connector that can be ridden. It will be interesting to see what the city thinks.