Ironic that this facebook post ended up getting all users banned when their intention was to get only bikers banned.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209796436255563[HTML_REMOVED]set=o.733760243364235[HTML_REMOVED]type=3

Then trying to blame bikers for the current situation is laughable.

WOW! she's good. Crazy how one person can destroy everything if they push hard enough. She's one vindictive human.

WOW! she's good. Crazy how one person can destroy everything if they push hard enough. She's one vindictive human.

Let's not get too hung up on that FB post. The trails have been there for years and have been public for everyone to see. Attributing this situation to one person gives too much credit.

I noticed that a comment on the FB post has just appeared personally attacking the original poster. As stated by pete@nsmb, best to take the high road and ignore.

Too late!

I don't understand the "environmental impact" argument regarding mountain bike trails. As someone replied to one of the comments, mountain bike trails are "two foot wide paths in the woods". If you look at BC for example, basically 95% of the land is untouched forest, the remaining 5% is used by humans (mostly for housing development, farming, forestry, mining, roads, etc.) and of that 5% that is used by humans, probably 0.0000001% contains mountain bike trails. So to say that we shouldn't build mountain bike trails because it hurts the environment is ridiculous.

I'm not saying that mountain biking should just go and create trails anywhere and everywhere they please, but to suggest that mountain bike trails as a whole have any sort of remotely substantial environmental impact is complete BS.

I made that post because I won't allow people to claim they care about the environment when they single out riders and turn a blind eye to everything else. How many square kilometers of Seymour is taken up by trails? Trails that consist of dirt, rock and fallen timber. Now tell me how many square kilometers of Seymour has been developed for residential, commercial and industrial purposes. Eagle, Burke and Cypress are great (and recent) examples where people complain about trails while the mountain side is literally torn apart for development. Pointing out simple facts like this will help our cause much more than engaging in name calling.

It seems painfully ironic.

everyone should park and change in front of Monica's house. She will have a coronary…

[QUOTE=cerealkilla';2929911]It seems painfully ironic that her actions (if truly the catalyst here), not only resulted in stated prohibitions against ALL user groups, but will also direct a flood of traffic toward Fromme, where much of her concern was focused in the first place.

Plus one for Pete.[/QUOTE]

a lot of fromme land is owned by grouse mountain and it's for sale. wonder what's going to happen once it sells.

everyone should park and change in front of Monica's house. She will have a coronary…

No and no. This is the exact kind of suggestion that makes bikers look bad. There may be frustration and other negative feelings coming out of this, but bikers must not only take the high road, but must also speak the high road. Even if opponents stoop low, stay high.

[QUOTE=cerealkilla';2929916] Even if opponents stoop low, stay high.[/QUOTE]

nastywoman

Yes, everybody stay high until this thing is sorted …

duuuuuuuude!

Metro's map is herefyi

http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/parks/ParksPublications/LowerLSCR.pdf#search="lscr%20map"

For those that need more of a visual on how much of Seymour this affects!

One more thing…..this is not a biker issue. Do not claim the issue as yours, and do not let it get twisted into a bikers vs. landowners matter. MTB has a role to play, but they should not place themselves in any assumed position of authority or responsibility to solve this.

Even if "someone" wants it to look like a "bike" problem, that is not the issue here. There are certain parties that are seeking to interfere with biking (for whatever reasons). They may well hope to try to start a big fight with landowners, with no regard to who gets dragged into it…like some sort of twisted Manson-esque quest to bring about a land war.

Just remember, bikers are one among many user groups, who must TOGETHER work to sort out this matter of land use. Anyone not wanting to work together with other groups will simply self-identify themselves through actions and words that create divisions. This is a community issue, that challenges bikers, hikers, runners, fishers, outdoor programs, , photographers, residents of all backgrounds and age groups and heritage, and so forth to work together.

This is really a very good test for MTB to step up. Your (our) ability to work together, represent, and cooperate has never been more important.

Regardless of outcome, there is good to come of this. To be clear, it would truly suck to lose riding access in the said area, or hiking or any access. However, land use and land stewardship considerations have changed drastically in this province over the past few decades. All groups need to be prepared for an outcome in which they don't get everything they want, and that things may not carry on business as usual. However, if by working on this issue, we can build healthy relationships with other user-groups, we will be so much better equipped and prepared to deal with future challenges…..and there will be many.

We have incredible people in the biking community….really incredible people. Follow the good examples. Stay calm, commit to process, work together.

[QUOTE=cerealkilla';2929926]One more thing…..this is not a biker issue. Do not claim the issue as yours, and do not let it get twisted into a bikers vs. landowners matter. MTB has a role to play, but they should not place themselves in any assumed position of authority or responsibility to solve this.[/QUOTE]

Great points. All recreational trail users are impacted by this.

I'm concerned about the commercial dog walkers and their liability insurance. They're keeping a low profile for now, but once they figure out that a major claim could be denied if they’re trespassing they'll get more vocal.

As Metro Vancouver grows more trails will be built.
Even if these CHMC land trails get shut down pemanantly. There will be reroutes and new trail areas showing up.
So who looks like a donkey now?

[QUOTE=cerealkilla';2929926]Even if "someone" wants it to look like a "bike" problem, that is not the issue here. There are certain parties that are seeking to interfere with biking (for whatever reasons). They may well hope to try to start a big fight with landowners, with no regard to who gets dragged into it…like some sort of twisted Manson-esque quest to bring about a land war.[/QUOTE]

Oh, no kidding. "Someone" has already started framing the conversation by suggesting that hikers only care about keeping the Baden-Powell and the Bridle Path (BPsquared) trails open, and that all other trails are "biker" trails and thus don't matter to anyone of value.