#!markdown
I agree with you to a point, but the fact is this: consensus rules. Period. If
90% of riders are going down nothing but smooth trails and all the old trails
get little or no use guess what: it is easier to endorse the smooth ones and
thus decommission or close the harder ones. Fact. The resources go where the
population is (and this is not just limited to biking). I note as well a
direct correlation to the popularity of Fromme and the increase of groomed
runs (which is no surprise, but also an interesting political move to garner
more interest in the mountain such that advocacy is more relevant). I am not
saying do nothing. My point is (and seems continually lost on all whom view
it) is BALANCE. Moreover, and I see this more in how the changes are made, is
we are now at a point where the powers that be (if you would like to call them
that) are going to choose the obvious examples of maintainable trails and ban
the rest in order to force the focus of trail work. In my book, all I ask is
the older trails be left alone, maintained only as needed and NOT groomed to
placate the masses. Moreover, you fail to see the evolution of biking in how
one goes from doing roads, to groomed trails, to more "tough" challenges. I
don't see this progression as it is. I rode Fromme on Sunday, like always, and
MOST of the riders did the same thing: Seventh, Espresso and then whatever.
Perhaps C+C, but you can bet most bypassed Grannies and Upper Crippler. I note
as well Upper Oilcan does not see as much traffic as it use to (there use to
be groups at the entrance but not anymore). I have seen in the aforementioned
5 years you quote a definitive change on Fromme that is distinctly away from
technical riding to the smooth, groomed, non technical riding that we see now.
And what of the next 10 years? What will be expected by riders then? A shuttle
up Fromme? No work for the downhill? Purely paved trails since dirt becomes
slippery as it dries? Seventh is already essentially paved, but what of the
slippery slope this entails? And please don't bring my bike style into this. I
ride a Knolly Podium with a Monster T (which is no slouch to pedal up but I
do) not because it makes things easy. I have this setup since the bike will
take a beating and last, and from a financial standpoint, makes sense. My fork
is 10 years old and has saved my ass many times. It does NOT make the tech
trails easier since you still need body english skills and subtle nuance, all
of which the new flowy trails do not teach. And please do not insult my
intelligence about being an armchair observer on this. I spent $600 on my
chainsaw to do my part (not one cent of which is reimbursed by NSMBA or anyone
) or the RISK of using one. It took 2.5 hours to remove the spire that fell on
Grannies and that was a dangerous buck up. The one on Lower Crippler was
easier, but was pure happenstance. I personally love Pile of Rocks and removed
the fall at the end. Tree removal is dangerous work if not done properly, of
which anyone whom uses a chainsaw on a daily basis does like I can tell you. I
would like to point out that planting ferns on Lower Skull is nice, and I get
the soil erosion part, but IIRC from BC Parks removing ferns FOR ANY REASON is
an offence. Keep that in mind. With eyes on us it would take little to sway
opinion any way. But pointedly, the focus of my posts is not that things are
changing and how they are changing, but it seems to me the long term
implications of the said change are being given no consideration, and there is
a reason why and how things went the way they did (on Fromme in particular).
So long as the past and a good portion of that past is preserved, fine. But if
it is going to be all paved, smooth or removed, then that is not what I want
to see.
May 25, 2015, 5:30 p.m. - Peter Leeds
#!markdown I agree with you to a point, but the fact is this: consensus rules. Period. If 90% of riders are going down nothing but smooth trails and all the old trails get little or no use guess what: it is easier to endorse the smooth ones and thus decommission or close the harder ones. Fact. The resources go where the population is (and this is not just limited to biking). I note as well a direct correlation to the popularity of Fromme and the increase of groomed runs (which is no surprise, but also an interesting political move to garner more interest in the mountain such that advocacy is more relevant). I am not saying do nothing. My point is (and seems continually lost on all whom view it) is BALANCE. Moreover, and I see this more in how the changes are made, is we are now at a point where the powers that be (if you would like to call them that) are going to choose the obvious examples of maintainable trails and ban the rest in order to force the focus of trail work. In my book, all I ask is the older trails be left alone, maintained only as needed and NOT groomed to placate the masses. Moreover, you fail to see the evolution of biking in how one goes from doing roads, to groomed trails, to more "tough" challenges. I don't see this progression as it is. I rode Fromme on Sunday, like always, and MOST of the riders did the same thing: Seventh, Espresso and then whatever. Perhaps C+C, but you can bet most bypassed Grannies and Upper Crippler. I note as well Upper Oilcan does not see as much traffic as it use to (there use to be groups at the entrance but not anymore). I have seen in the aforementioned 5 years you quote a definitive change on Fromme that is distinctly away from technical riding to the smooth, groomed, non technical riding that we see now. And what of the next 10 years? What will be expected by riders then? A shuttle up Fromme? No work for the downhill? Purely paved trails since dirt becomes slippery as it dries? Seventh is already essentially paved, but what of the slippery slope this entails? And please don't bring my bike style into this. I ride a Knolly Podium with a Monster T (which is no slouch to pedal up but I do) not because it makes things easy. I have this setup since the bike will take a beating and last, and from a financial standpoint, makes sense. My fork is 10 years old and has saved my ass many times. It does NOT make the tech trails easier since you still need body english skills and subtle nuance, all of which the new flowy trails do not teach. And please do not insult my intelligence about being an armchair observer on this. I spent $600 on my chainsaw to do my part (not one cent of which is reimbursed by NSMBA or anyone ) or the RISK of using one. It took 2.5 hours to remove the spire that fell on Grannies and that was a dangerous buck up. The one on Lower Crippler was easier, but was pure happenstance. I personally love Pile of Rocks and removed the fall at the end. Tree removal is dangerous work if not done properly, of which anyone whom uses a chainsaw on a daily basis does like I can tell you. I would like to point out that planting ferns on Lower Skull is nice, and I get the soil erosion part, but IIRC from BC Parks removing ferns FOR ANY REASON is an offence. Keep that in mind. With eyes on us it would take little to sway opinion any way. But pointedly, the focus of my posts is not that things are changing and how they are changing, but it seems to me the long term implications of the said change are being given no consideration, and there is a reason why and how things went the way they did (on Fromme in particular). So long as the past and a good portion of that past is preserved, fine. But if it is going to be all paved, smooth or removed, then that is not what I want to see.