New posts

Why has Pink Starfish been decommissioned?

Aug. 6, 2016, 8:22 p.m.
Posts: 632
Joined: Jan. 27, 2010

Haha! That is my name and you're still hiding behind a computer! There's some trails that I would prefer to ride over others, but it doesn't mean they suck. Who cares if you don't like it. Keep it to yourself

Don!!
Spitting fire , AND the TRUTH!

Aug. 6, 2016, 8:45 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 12, 2007

The only good part of Expresso is the original entrance.

Much of the old trail is still there, just getting more covered in debris. I only have a small pocket saw but I guess no-one would mind if you cleared it if you think the new version sucks so hard. It's a shame to see the old line go (and I have been on several build days on the new version….).

treezz
wow you are a ass

Aug. 7, 2016, 2:41 p.m.
Posts: 3801
Joined: April 13, 2003

The old entrance actually had lots of work done it by me and Diggs and around 50 others during the first NSMB Tap day on Expresso. Lots of options for the masses.

:canada:

Aug. 7, 2016, 8:23 p.m.
Posts: 985
Joined: Feb. 28, 2014

Haha! That is my name and you're still hiding behind a computer! There's some trails that I would prefer to ride over others, but it doesn't mean they suck. Who cares if you don't like it. Keep it to yourself

Don is my spirit animal.

The new expresso is the best trail on the shore. Well, on Fromme anyway. It closely resembles trails that you'll see all over the province (re: fast an fun). It could use a few steep berms or corner ruts but otherwise its a blast.

Aug. 7, 2016, 10 p.m.
Posts: 979
Joined: March 15, 2013

Don is my spirit animal.

The new expresso is the best trail on the shore. Well, on Fromme anyway. It closely resembles trails that you'll see all over the province (re: fast an fun). It could use a few steep berms or corner ruts but otherwise its a blast.

lol @ that bait.

Aug. 13, 2016, 12:12 a.m.
Posts: 8605
Joined: Nov. 15, 2002

The old entrance actually had lots of work done it by me and Diggs and around 50 others during the first NSMBA Tap day on Expresso. Lots of options for the masses.

Is that a typo?

Aug. 15, 2016, 8:52 a.m.
Posts: 3801
Joined: April 13, 2003

Is that a typo?

my bad… NSMB not NSMBA.

:canada:

Aug. 15, 2016, 10:41 a.m.
Posts: 6328
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

The trend of the Land managers is to move away from Structures. Metro Van has been most active, see CBC, Corkscrew, Dales.

It's no wonder that the DNV would also be moving away. Considering the unpopularity of structures it's great that the structures on Ladies Only are being built and supported. Considering the long relationship the DNV has had with Digger and his constant stewardship of his trails (both as volunteer and as a paid builder) I'm sure that weighed heavily in his favour.

Pink Starfish has always been a contentious trail. Not sure why. Of course in 2007 it was slated for 'Active Decommissioning'. But so were other trails that have not garnered as much attention that are still open and have even been worked on. Penzoil for example.

Another NSMBA Director took an active role in working with the DNV to have the area of Starfish that went through a Riparian Zone rerouted. Then for some reason a few vocal non-mountain bikers have made this trail an issue. It was this that made the trail so sensitive.

The question remains, if DNV gave a permit to build new structures, why did they have to be dismantled? The structures on Ladies Only are ok, the structures on Upper Oilcan, 7th, Pipeline and Boundary are ok. Why target Pink Starfish? Why not let the structures get fixed, under a proper permit?

Whatever people think, this is a fundamental question and its unfortunate that the NSMBA's paid crew had to waste their resources in building then dismantling the structures.

Especially when Rachid said:

Originally Posted by rnayel View Post
Many trails that have been perceived as dumbed down in fact actually suffered from erosion and an accumulation of many years of under maintenance or in some cases neglect. Situations where the original builder's intent was no longer reflected in the nature of the trail. I for one do not believe that the most easily accessible trails should be difficult ones. There should be progression as you move up the mountain. In that spirit, having natural high as a black or double black trail would be inconsistent with the idea of a trail network that encourages progression. If you want challenge there is still plenty of challenge on Fromme, you just have to pedal up a bit further. The NSMBA is finally in a position to reflect a vision where the trails we have are part of a network and that ultimately for our sport to continue to expand we need progression. When your mandate is to have trails for all, it can only be successfully met by unceasing diversity.

It seems the NSMBA's goal is to have easier trails and minimal structures lower on the mountain. Presumably the easier trails would be below the BP; this is something consistent with the DNV's position. The NSMBA's plan would be then to work to have structures and more challenging features on trails higher up. Which is consistent to the rebuilt structures on UOC and new structures on 7th. It does mean that maybe that's why Natural High is now easier and maybe means Immonator and Lower Ladies will be made easier but if that's what the DNV and NSMBA want then so be it.

Maybe if the structures on Starfish were merely rebuilt or repaired instead of building completely new features? Would that be a decent solution?

Looking to ride the shore but don't know where to go?

Get a copy of the Locals Guide to North Shore Rides!

Follow MTB Trails on Twitter

Follow Sharon and Lee on Twitter

Aug. 15, 2016, 6:57 p.m.
Posts: 608
Joined: Feb. 11, 2003

Someone wants to donate all their free time to recycle an existing line with a "new school" feel, and its dismantled.

What a shame.

From what I saw, it would have been a popular trail.

In 15 years or so when the ttf's become questionable remove them in minutes if its a problem.

If liability is an issue, it's just as easy to get injured at speed on all the trails.

I'm glad we don't have this bullshit on Burke…..yet.

Chainsmoker 8)

Aug. 15, 2016, 8:32 p.m.
Posts: 18275
Joined: Oct. 28, 2003

I'd be more worried about the development heading up Burke.

Aug. 15, 2016, 8:38 p.m.
Posts: 608
Joined: Feb. 11, 2003

I'd be more worried about the development heading up Burke.

News flash…Government sells bc park to wesbuild…..

Yikes!!!

Chainsmoker 8)

Aug. 16, 2016, 5:23 p.m.
Posts: 1230
Joined: Dec. 3, 2003

The question remains, if DNV gave a permit to build new structures, why did they have to be dismantled? The structures on Ladies Only are ok, the structures on Upper Oilcan, 7th, Pipeline and Boundary are ok. Why target Pink Starfish? Why not let the structures get fixed, under a proper permit?

Sharon, you have the channels to ask the land manager directly. Why don't you?

Aug. 16, 2016, 5:35 p.m.
Posts: 6328
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

Sharon, you have the channels to ask the land manager directly. Why don't you?

We did.

Looking to ride the shore but don't know where to go?

Get a copy of the Locals Guide to North Shore Rides!

Follow MTB Trails on Twitter

Follow Sharon and Lee on Twitter

Aug. 16, 2016, 5:47 p.m.
Posts: 1230
Joined: Dec. 3, 2003

We did.

Then please go on public record with the details.

Aug. 16, 2016, 6:55 p.m.
Posts: 6328
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

Then please go on public record with the details.

They have no record of a permit for New Structures on Pink Starfish, only for the removal of unsafe and dilapidated structures.

Which explains why the new structures were dismantled on Pink Starfish and not the other trails.

Looking to ride the shore but don't know where to go?

Get a copy of the Locals Guide to North Shore Rides!

Follow MTB Trails on Twitter

Follow Sharon and Lee on Twitter

Forum jump: