New posts

No Trespassing signs on CMHC lands and trails

Nov. 2, 2016, 11:04 a.m.
Posts: 740
Joined: Aug. 14, 2003

I pointed out earlier that in many situations, MTB and other user groups have had great success in preserving trails and access through maintaining good relationships with land and license holders. I mention the latter because sometimes knowing your local logging company also very important. Some examples have been pointed out in the Sea to Sky corridor. In some cases, these “good relationships” are understanding that the landowner doesn’t want to know and doesn’t want to care about what goes on, and is comfortable with people accessing his or her land as long as they don’t erect buildings or start fires. In other cases, those good relationships are based on the user groups acknowledging risks, and taking steps to help the landowner control liability. These good relationships in some cases require technical savvy….in all cases they require people skills to establish positive conversations. Let’s talk about what skills and assets are required for preserving trails and access.

One must first ask what actual level of power is actually held by recreation groups in decision-making processes around private land, and what their best strategies are for preserving access as development advances.

I think we can safely assume that development will continue, and many private lands that we now enjoy access to will change over the coming decades. There has been some (at times wild) speculation on this board about the plans for certain areas, and the intentions of certain landowners with respect to land development. Without delving into the morass of assuming corporate intentions, we can simply take for granted that some land will develop. I would suggest that there is a long list of factors affecting the decisions around development (zoning, environmental, housing supply, market, regulations….) and that recreation groups are only one of many influences… and not necessarily a particularly powerful influence when it comes right down to the final decision.

One may even suggest that recreation groups are merely humored and accommodated by development because they are part of the community. If developers can get some support from rec-groups, it is simply a bonus to the marketing of their plan, but they will just as easily bulldoze over us if push comes to shove.

Thus, one may argue that the best strategy for preserving trails and access is building positive functional relationships with landowners, and taking steps to help them, and others involved in the decision-making processes, to see the trails as an asset and a feature to be retained during planning. In contrast, preparing for a fight and vesting oneself in confrontational strategies and court challenges may be less viable. There certainly may be cases in which more assertive action is warranted. However, the best bet for MTB and other rec-groups may lie in the ability to bring people together, maintain internal cohesion, and support leaders that can help negotiate continued access in a civil and cooperative manner. In this respect, it is important to consider the skills and qualities needed to succeed here.

Some people are simply naturals at building…this includes building trails and building communities. I speak to the latter here- about supporting and getting behind people with the right “soft skills” for helping MTB navigate trial access issues. Indeed, it also takes technical and regulatory savvy at times. However, it seems that in this CMHC case, the day was “won” not by the people with the most compelling legal argument, but by the people that rallied community in communicating the value of these trails, and establishing positive links with CMHC…not by focusing on grievances and demands and conflict. In contrast, some people try to change the world through asserting power, or they are easily threatened and seek to respond with force. I will concede that I myself sometimes fall into this camp, and perhaps may disqualify myself as an ideal leader because of my tendency toward not backing down, when the best tactic is really to ignore and walk away…my tolerance level is simply very low for certain behaviors. I know of course that I am not alone, and others here have similarly disqualified themselves in leading the charge for managing trails. Of course, I do not presume to lead, and prefer to observe and analyze. Others just want to ride! However, this post is not intended to be either confession period or the Spanish Inquisition. It is an attempt to look beyond the trolling and arguing, and extract learning outcomes from this CMHC case that can help the MTB community grow and prosper as an effective influence on recreational access (for riders and others). There’s been a lot of wasted energy in this thread and the entire CMHC case, and it would be a shame for the ridership to focus on the crap, and not on the process and the lessons…...this is not about pointing out things people did wrong, but what were the things that were done right?

It goes without saying that this consideration of “skills required” is germane to election of NSMBA Board of Directors, as well as other processes of choosing leadership. Perhaps these ideas go without saying given the good job done thus far in establishing MTB as an effective player in recreation (here and elsewhere). But I also want to ask readers to consider what they learned in this thread and this process. Don’t remember the best burn, or worry about separating accusations and counter-attacks.

What did we really learn? What was the outcome of the CMHC process, and how should it inform future action? Who were the leaders that actually brought people together, and what qualities helped them achieve their goals? What does this tell you about how MTB has grown, and what is needed for it to continue to grow?

Nov. 2, 2016, 3:30 p.m.
Posts: 549
Joined: Sept. 2, 2010

You're right.

Probably took the fun I was having with the wannabe too far.

He jumped the shark for me when he accused the parents and others of causing that kids paralysis on the mc thread.

I am done - he's a douchebag, will always be so, and it appears he is irredeemable.

I agree also that the way forward is to show the powers that be (politicians and developers/land owners) that trails are an amenity and community asset. In Northern BC we have been doing this for going on 10 years. It works for NV. I for one spent money in the DNV the last time I was down and some friends took me for a few laps. (they told me the trail was called CBC - but for some reason my GPS was seized before the ride began).

Plus, Vancouver is an expensive place to live. To be able to justify it to prospective employees etc. local businesses will have to show that it is worth it. Trails do that. Trails make up, to a certain extent, for the smaller living space and the higher prices.

Here I work with a developer that has included access to our trail network in their advertising. Developers there may learn the benefit of such advertising in the future as well.

Look at the folks we have on this board, doctors, engineers, pretend lawyers - these people will be the ones purchasing those developments if the off-shore bubble bursts (although I hear that biking in Hong Kong is gaining in popularity and it is only a matter of time before the same occurs on the mainland). It is those relationships that will bring new and better trails and protect the ones we have.

Nov. 2, 2016, 3:39 p.m.
Posts: 1781
Joined: Feb. 26, 2015


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q

People always ask me what's the phenomenon
Yo what's up? Yo what's goin' on- Adam Yauch

Nov. 2, 2016, 5:21 p.m.
Posts: 1141
Joined: Dec. 16, 2008

……..
Plus, Vancouver is an expensive place to live. To be able to justify it to prospective employees etc. local businesses will have to show that it is worth it. Trails do that. Trails make up, to a certain extent, for the smaller living space and the higher prices.

Here I work with a developer that has included access to our trail network in their advertising. Developers there may learn the benefit of such advertising in the future as well.

Look at the folks we have on this board, doctors, engineers, pretend lawyers - these people will be the ones purchasing those developments

I'm one of those people…

…..

if the off-shore bubble bursts (although I hear that biking in Hong Kong is gaining in popularity and it is only a matter of time before the same occurs on the mainland). It is those relationships that will bring new and better trails and protect the ones we have.

I hadn't thought of that…good point. Appeals to everyone, really.

Nov. 3, 2016, 9:41 a.m.
Posts: 549
Joined: Sept. 2, 2010

^ I think that this is sometimes forgotten in the serious 'bidness of land management OCP's LUP's OPM's etc. etc. - Biking is F*kn FUN.

The "Land Managers" of the future up here are First Nations. If we want to have a voice at their table we have to speak to their youth and get them as stoked on biking as we are.

You think any NIMBY is going to try and get these guy's trails shutdown? Think they will be successful?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/david-common-yukon-mountain-biking-1.3606226

Given the allegation (not opining on the veracity of it - just that it exists) that the original transfer to CMHC was done to thwart a Fn Land Claim - it may be time for the NSMBA to do some out reach. Transferring land to defeat a potential land claim, on the face of it, does not sound like the Crown was doing it's best to uphold their fiduciary duty to the local FN. If and when this land becomes a point of contention, wouldn't it be worthwhile to have advocates for trails on both sides of the table?

Plus did I mention it's F'KN Fun? You know what else is fun? Getting kids out riding and having FUUUUN.

Nov. 3, 2016, 10:12 a.m.
Posts: 1227
Joined: Dec. 3, 2003

He jumped the shark for me when he accused the parents and others of causing that kids paralysis on the mc thread.

This hit a nerve with me. It reveals a person's character when they don't care who they hurt.

I can work with just about anyone, but when they'll deliberately hurt vulnerable people to promote their own goals, there's no point engaging them.

Nov. 3, 2016, 10:13 a.m.
Posts: 299
Joined: June 21, 2010

The "Land Managers" of the future up here are First Nations. If we want to have a voice at their table we have to speak to their youth and get them as stoked on biking as we are.

Damn right. Ain't no nimbys shutting that down.

Nov. 3, 2016, 11:37 a.m.
Posts: 1668
Joined: Aug. 6, 2009

Given the allegation (not opining on the veracity of it - just that it exists) that the original transfer to CMHC was done to thwart a Fn Land Claim - it may be time for the NSMBA to do some out reach. Transferring land to defeat a potential land claim, on the face of it, does not sound like the Crown was doing it's best to uphold their fiduciary duty to the local FN. If and when this land becomes a point of contention, wouldn't it be worthwhile to have advocates for trails on both sides of the table?

It's worth noting that the local band is cutting down their forest and putting up town houses as fast as they can these days. I can't complain too much, as I live in one of their developments, but it has been interesting to watch them pivot from promoting the "quiet beauty of sacred forest lands" to bulldozing that same land to make way for 100 new homes.

Nov. 3, 2016, 12:22 p.m.
Posts: 7707
Joined: Sept. 11, 2003

Some nice new hiking trails have gone in on the DarkSide of Mount Seymour, connecting a network of what used to be old skidder roads and hardscrabble. It seems things are more peaceful and laid-back on that DNV side of the mountain.

It's worth noting that the local band is cutting down their forest and putting up town houses as fast as they can these days. I can't complain too much, as I live in one of their developments, but it has been interesting to watch them pivot from promoting the "quiet beauty of sacred forest lands" to bulldozing that same land to make way for 100 new homes.

Its OK, because just after they start pouring concrete, they'll put a a big sign saying "FOREST GLADE BY POLYGON" or some such. All us peeps gotta live somewhere.

Nov. 3, 2016, 1 p.m.
Posts: 1745
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

It's worth noting that the local band is cutting down their forest and putting up town houses as fast as they can these days. I can't complain too much, as I live in one of their developments, but it has been interesting to watch them pivot from promoting the "quiet beauty of sacred forest lands" to bulldozing that same land to make way for 100 new homes.

when it comes to thier homes, everyone seems to throw th environmental picture/stance out the window. case in point the houses at the top of mtn highway that sit on pristine wilderness close to sensitive frog ponds.

protect the land just as long as it doens't impact where i live.

Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity ~ Seneca

Nov. 3, 2016, 6:34 p.m.
Posts: 112
Joined: Aug. 11, 2015

case in point the houses at the top of mtn highway that sit on pristine wilderness close to sensitive frog ponds.

ha! somehow i don't think they considered that when buying

Nov. 4, 2016, 8:47 a.m.
Posts: 2273
Joined: Nov. 22, 2002

As per
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/employment-business-and-economic-development/business-management/permits-licences-and-registration/corporations/societies/societies_act_transition_guide.pdf

The new Societies Act will come into effect on Nov. 28, 2016.

While we're pointing out small details that HC -er, Uncle Scrooge got wrong, and this one is far more significant than a missed date:

Bikes are not more damaging to trails than hikers. They have been found to be quite similar in impact.

In fact, depending on the area, the way that hikers treat things like puddles (by avoiding them, thus widening the trail) and the concentrated force that goes into a bootstep vs a rolling tire, hiking can have more of an impact than biking.

Yes, there are studies to support this. You just have to look it up, Uncle Scrooge. But you might want to have that fact straight before you go disparaging mtn bikers the next time someone deigns to let you have a moment or two of their time. You also may want to be clear on that before you run for the NSMBA's board of directors.

Completely unrelated, because I can't let this go without mentioning it: schizophrenia is not the same thing as multiple personality disorder. When someone uses schizophrenic to indicate either multiple personalities, or multiple perspective on something - they're flat wrong and it's a lazy literary term anyway. Schizophrenia is a disorder that mostly entails an inability to process different stimuli. How's that for epic thread derailment?

So now that CMHC lands are fair game for recreational use again, I think this week's #flaskfriday will probably celebrate that fact.

Nov. 4, 2016, 8:55 a.m.
Posts: 7707
Joined: Sept. 11, 2003

bikes are not more damaging to trails than hikers. They have been found to be quite similar in impact.

If you want to see it first hand, just walk the last section of the Baden Powell trail between Quarry rock and Deep Cove, or the Grouse Grind.

Nov. 4, 2016, 2:16 p.m.
Posts: 296
Joined: Jan. 25, 2011

Completely unrelated, because I can't let this go without mentioning it: schizophrenia is not the same thing as multiple personality disorder.

That's right Pete. Schizophrenia is also often confused with Schizoid personality disorder…

Schizoid personality disorder (SPD) is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of interest in social relationships, a tendency towards a solitary or sheltered lifestyle, secretiveness, emotional coldness, and apathy. Affected individuals may simultaneously demonstrate a rich, elaborate and exclusively internal fantasy world

Hmmm…

Nov. 4, 2016, 7:07 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Nov. 4, 2016

[QUOTE=ol' dirty;2931436]That's right Pete. Schizophrenia is also often confused with Schizoid personality disorder…

Schizoid personality disorder (SPD) is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of interest in social relationships, a tendency towards a solitary or sheltered lifestyle, secretiveness, emotional coldness, and apathy. Affected individuals may simultaneously demonstrate a rich, elaborate and exclusively internal fantasy world

Hmmm…

I post on behalf of my employer Lord Scrooge McDuck

Mr. Roggeman is apparently a man of letters, formerly trained in psychiatry.

Here we thought he was merely a drunkard which, off course, would make him a man of the world.

Smedley Pennyworth Esq

Forum jump: