#!markdown
Nanaman, I agree with you about much of this, and understand your fear about
the shore being dumbed down. I also enjoy the tech, (but not so much the loose
boulder pit that expresso had become).
A couple of points to consider - I would say that right now 90% of the trails
on the shore are for the top 20% of riders. We have a lot at our disposal,
while other don't.
You said that if easier trails were needed, that new ones should be built -
the land managers have basically banned the building of new trails because
they see the mess the old trails have become.
There is a big difference between the state of say expresso just prior to tap,
and expresso back when it was first made. The "What the trail was intended to
be" point just isn't true in most cases. If you talk to the original trail
builders, they are the first to admit that what the trails have become is not
what they were intended to be.
It is always a shame to give up some trails to beginner/intermediate riders,
but i think it is the right thing for us to do. We have a lot, they don't have
much.
It is my hope (and I know the hope of the NSMBA), that by building more
environmentally, and all user friendly trails, that the land managers will be
more supportive of us, and then let us build more advanced trails again.
If you (or anyone else reading) haven't, I strongly recommend going to a trail
academy session. A lot of the reasons for questions asked in forums like these
are answered in a detailed and concise way.
Dec. 6, 2013, 12:01 p.m. - nzstormer
#!markdown Nanaman, I agree with you about much of this, and understand your fear about the shore being dumbed down. I also enjoy the tech, (but not so much the loose boulder pit that expresso had become). A couple of points to consider - I would say that right now 90% of the trails on the shore are for the top 20% of riders. We have a lot at our disposal, while other don't. You said that if easier trails were needed, that new ones should be built - the land managers have basically banned the building of new trails because they see the mess the old trails have become. There is a big difference between the state of say expresso just prior to tap, and expresso back when it was first made. The "What the trail was intended to be" point just isn't true in most cases. If you talk to the original trail builders, they are the first to admit that what the trails have become is not what they were intended to be. It is always a shame to give up some trails to beginner/intermediate riders, but i think it is the right thing for us to do. We have a lot, they don't have much. It is my hope (and I know the hope of the NSMBA), that by building more environmentally, and all user friendly trails, that the land managers will be more supportive of us, and then let us build more advanced trails again. If you (or anyone else reading) haven't, I strongly recommend going to a trail academy session. A lot of the reasons for questions asked in forums like these are answered in a detailed and concise way.