To the ass-hat on Bridle today at 5pm...rant-warning

Posted by: MaxRockatansky

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

The Indian River road closure is complete BS...

This. I can only presume someone that lives out at woodlands is on council....

I live on the suburbia end of IR rd and I will tell you what is more dangerous than a few people hiking / biking in the forest; It's the speed at which entitled woodlands residents drive through our neighbourhood....

I'm curious if there are any other covid related road closures at all in the entire province. Closing something like a restaurant, movie theatre, (non-essential) store, etc. you can understand as that puts people very close to each other in an indoor space, thus increasing the risk of covid transmission. How do you then apply that same concept to a road, and more specifically, a random road through a forest in a sparsely populated area. I'd love to hear someone from (whoever is responsible for it) to try to justify it.

I believe it's still there so people can't access Quarry Rock from above.  A quick email to DNV would confirm.

Posted by: heckler

Cool. You're informed. I was only getting nyself informed. Thanks for the links.

Trailforks shows all trails as unsanctioned and without a trail association on Burke BC Parks. Its an uphill battle for a few dedicated volunteers to change that They can all use our support via paid memberships

https://torca.ca/trails/trail-building/

https://www.trailforks.com/region/burke-mountain/?activitytype=1&z=12.0&lat=49.32558&lon=-122.75096 shows TORCA as local trail association. Also says "BC Parks is currently drafting a Management Plan for the Park. TORCA is advocating for mountain bike trails to be included in the plan."

So if these trails are unsanctioned, why are they showing up in TF? TF not showing the unsanctioned ones in Seymour (which they shouldn't).  I'm very confused and feel there is a double standard.

Posted by: LoamtoHome

I believe it's still there so people can't access Quarry Rock from above.  A quick email to DNV would confirm.

I guess that's the one semi logical reason... but even the Quarry Rock closure, yeah it's busy trail for hiking trails, but in the grand scheme of things I'd say that's very low on the covid risk heirarchy. What other hiking trails/outdoor areas are still closed because of Covid? They closed down a lot of that stuff at the beginning of Coivd but then soon realized it made no sense, and 99% of outdoor stuff was reopened but Quarry Rock was like the one exception for some reason. As someone who lives downtown, every single day I am in areas/situations with far more people than you'd ever encounter on Quarry Rock. Walking down the seawall for example, or any sidewalk... and I'm be pretty confident in guessing that there have been next to no seawall related covid transmission over the past year with thousands of people on it every single day. IMO the Quarry Rock/IRR/Deep Cove closures just seem very NIMBY to me.

@Bulldozer

I actually think that "Local traffic only" sign pre-dates COVID (not 100% sure about that but it shows up on Google Maps Street view so depends when the photos were taken)

I'm curious what defines "local" as it doesn't say "residents only" and I live fairly local 😉

I've ignored that sign when I ride my road bike up there or I want to go dog walking...

Google copyright is showing 2021 so doesn't help...

Indian River Crescent

https://maps.app.goo.gl/enJgTY2CB73v7s1s5

Posted by: SixZeroSixOne

Google copyright is showing 2021 so doesn't help...

Indian River Crescent

https://maps.app.goo.gl/enJgTY2CB73v7s1s5

The street view you linked is actually from 2011 so you're right. On the top left corner if you click "street view" you can actually see the streetview at 4 different points in time.

I guess the sign up there sort of makes sense because there's not really much reason for non-residents to pass that point (ignoring the Baden Powell trail). 

Is it not a public road regardless though? I don't know how those laws work. Isn't the Mount Seymour road under the responsibility of the ski hill and not a fully public road? Perhaps the same concept applies to IRR...

IRR is a public road until you get to the mailboxes and go left.  It's a private road on crown land and the residents are not fond of anyone than don't live there.  I've been run off the road a couple of times, videotaped, talked to, etc.  They say their concern is liability with the insurance for the road which is moot due to BC Liability Act but they really want the place to themselves and don't want outsiders.  One of the residents in Woodlands is known to sabotage one of the trails on a regular basis that finishes on IRR.

You can't make a public road "locals only" and if you have a private road (is it really if on crown land?), you better lock it up if you don't want people on it.

NV is full of nimby's and I can sort of understand that with the huge influx of asshats on a regular basis.  Toll the bridges!

Posted by: LoamtoHome

IRR is a public road until you get to the mailboxes and go left.  It's a private road on crown land and the residents are not fond of anyone than don't live there.  I've been run off the road a couple of times, videotaped, talked to, etc.  They say their concern is liability with the insurance for the road which is moot due to BC Liability Act but they really want the place to themselves and don't want outsiders.  One of the residents in Woodlands is known to sabotage one of the trails on a regular basis that finishes on IRR.

You can't make a public road "locals only" and if you have a private road (is it really if on crown land?), you better lock it up if you don't want people on it.

NV is full of nimby's and I can sort of understand that with the huge influx of asshats on a regular basis.  Toll the bridges!

Just wondering...when you've had these "interactions", were you driving at the time? I've hiked/dog walked and ridden my road bike along the private road a couple of times and nobody I met has said anything to me...

I also have a recent experience with an unhelmeted asshat on an e-bike being a d-bag, blowing through a crowd of people.

But... this thread sounds a lot like walkers/hikers bitching about mountain bikers. I am cognizant of the trap of making associations with an easily-identifiable group. Like any group, there is a certain portion who are dicks. But I have no doubt that the majority of e-bikers are reasonable people.

Posted by: Bull_Dozer

Posted by: SixZeroSixOne

Google copyright is showing 2021 so doesn't help...

Indian River Crescent

https://maps.app.goo.gl/enJgTY2CB73v7s1s5

The street view you linked is actually from 2011 so you're right. On the top left corner if you click "street view" you can actually see the streetview at 4 different points in time.

I guess the sign up there sort of makes sense because there's not really much reason for non-residents to pass that point (ignoring the Baden Powell trail).

Is it not a public road regardless though? I don't know how those laws work. Isn't the Mount Seymour road under the responsibility of the ski hill and not a fully public road? Perhaps the same concept applies to IRR...

That sign has been there forever. The new Covid sign is out on Mt. Seymour Road, https://goo.gl/maps/8kjinfT9NdTz7krg8

That area has always been a PITA. There is a small cliff off one of the fire lanes that was developed for climbing ~20 years ago. The residents didn't like people parking on the narrow road, which is somehow private property. GeoWeb shows that most of the land that doesn't have a house on it is owned by DNV or the province. What I recall from the debate at the time is that the "private" designation is based on residents leasing the roads from DNV and/or the province.

Posted by: SixZeroSixOne

Posted by: LoamtoHome

IRR is a public road until you get to the mailboxes and go left.  It's a private road on crown land and the residents are not fond of anyone than don't live there.  I've been run off the road a couple of times, videotaped, talked to, etc.  They say their concern is liability with the insurance for the road which is moot due to BC Liability Act but they really want the place to themselves and don't want outsiders.  One of the residents in Woodlands is known to sabotage one of the trails on a regular basis that finishes on IRR.

You can't make a public road "locals only" and if you have a private road (is it really if on crown land?), you better lock it up if you don't want people on it.

NV is full of nimby's and I can sort of understand that with the huge influx of asshats on a regular basis.  Toll the bridges!

Just wondering...when you've had these "interactions", were you driving at the time? I've hiked/dog walked and ridden my road bike along the private road a couple of times and nobody I met has said anything to me...

interactions were on a bike.  They don't want bikes down there  but the interactions have died down last couple of years as the residents have realized they actually can't do much to stop it.  If you park down there and are in a vehicle, prepare to get questioned why you are there and you will get towed if you park there.

Posted by: LoamtoHome

Posted by: heckler

Cool. You're informed. I was only getting nyself informed. Thanks for the links.

Trailforks shows all trails as unsanctioned and without a trail association on Burke BC Parks. Its an uphill battle for a few dedicated volunteers to change that They can all use our support via paid memberships

https://torca.ca/trails/trail-building/

https://www.trailforks.com/region/burke-mountain/?activitytype=1&z=12.0&lat=49.32558&lon=-122.75096 shows TORCA as local trail association. Also says "BC Parks is currently drafting a Management Plan for the Park. TORCA is advocating for mountain bike trails to be included in the plan."

So if these trails are unsanctioned, why are they showing up in TF? TF not showing the unsanctioned ones in Seymour (which they shouldn't).  I'm very confused and feel there is a double standard.

"Unsanctioned" or "Unauthorized" generally means that there's no official recognition of the trails by the relevant land manager / land owner. Sometimes these are "secret" trails (and in the case of some Seymour trails, ones you can get fined for riding), but in many cases there are trails that have existed for many years and the land manager / trail association don't have an agreement for them, the trails have been appearing on maps for years and are well known to the public. Often (e.g. the case with Burke, thanks to the awesome advocacy work of TORCA) there is ongoing work to get the trails officially recognized. Makes sense to have them on TF but with note that they are not authorized. Not really a double standard, but different situations. Trail orgs have admin access to hide/delete trails if they are sensitive, so often what appears on TF is what the trail org has deemed to be ok.

Posted by: mudhoney

Posted by: LoamtoHome

Posted by: heckler

Cool. You're informed. I was only getting nyself informed. Thanks for the links.

Trailforks shows all trails as unsanctioned and without a trail association on Burke BC Parks. Its an uphill battle for a few dedicated volunteers to change that They can all use our support via paid memberships

https://torca.ca/trails/trail-building/

https://www.trailforks.com/region/burke-mountain/?activitytype=1&z=12.0&lat=49.32558&lon=-122.75096 shows TORCA as local trail association. Also says "BC Parks is currently drafting a Management Plan for the Park. TORCA is advocating for mountain bike trails to be included in the plan."

So if these trails are unsanctioned, why are they showing up in TF? TF not showing the unsanctioned ones in Seymour (which they shouldn't). I'm very confused and feel there is a double standard.

"Unsanctioned" or "Unauthorized" generally means that there's no official recognition of the trails by the relevant land manager / land owner. Sometimes these are "secret" trails (and in the case of some Seymour trails, ones you can get fined for riding), but in many cases there are trails that have existed for many years and the land manager / trail association don't have an agreement for them, the trails have been appearing on maps for years and are well known to the public. Often (e.g. the case with Burke, thanks to the awesome advocacy work of TORCA) there is ongoing work to get the trails officially recognized. Makes sense to have them on TF but with note that they are not authorized. Not really a double standard, but different situations. Trail orgs have admin access to hide/delete trails if they are sensitive, so often what appears on TF is what the trail org has deemed to be ok.

thanks for chiming in.... different situations to a certain point as they have the same land manager and management plan but I'm happy the unsanctioned stuff is kept off TF for Seymour and NSMBA is not looking after it.