Seymour 2014 Conditions

my concern stems from sending a lot of newer riders down an advanced trail and the resultant damage that can occur.

Dales is hardly an advanced trail now. Minus that rock section the rest of the trail is intermediate. All the advanced features have been removed or rerouted.

The difficult sections on the remainder of the trail stem more from it being blown out from the increased traffic when it was tapped, plus being the obvious choice to get to Forever After.

With the lack of trail love last year, the increased use accelerated the deterioration, so a Big Big thank you to the mudbunnies and friends for tapping the trail.

The work the girls have done so far is great!

Rode Dales last night. Couldn't believe how much of a beating it's taken at the top since last year, and that rogue re-route around the rock may be a nice idea, but is some of the worst trail building I've seen in a loooooong time. The new work done the bottom is pretty nice though, so thanks for that!

I think the reroute around the rock face is a great idea and its character fits well with the difficult nature of Dales.

rode dales last weekend and i agree. the top is well built, the bottom's boggy but no worse than some other parts of the trail; damning it on principle seems a bit bloody minded

rode dales last weekend and i agree. the top is well built, the bottom's boggy but no worse than some other parts of the trail; damning it on principle seems a bit bloody minded

it's not so much the ride around itself being damned, but the net effect it has on the trail with the change in traffic it brings. and that gets back to riding culture, respect for the trails, etc.

it's not so much the ride around itself being damned, but the net effect it has on the trail with the change in traffic it brings. and that gets back to riding culture, respect for the trails, etc.

that's one way to look at it. or, it could get riders who wouldn't have considered dales interested in the trail and showing up/contributing to trail days now that its accessible to them. given the amount of volunteer time and energy the nsmba is helping pour into established trails, this seems like a more hopeful and realistic scenario than trying to keep the trail exclusive and ridership depressed

that's one way to look at it. or, it could get riders who wouldn't have considered dales interested in the trail and showing up/contributing to trail days now that its accessible to them.

sure you can do that, which leads to the intermedification of certain tails like this…

Dales is hardly an advanced trail now. Minus that rock section the rest of the trail is intermediate. All the advanced features have been removed or rerouted.

given the amount of volunteer time and energy the nsmba is helping pour into established trails, this seems like a more hopeful and realistic scenario than trying to keep the trail exclusive and ridership depressed

why is it such a bad thing to suggest that some trails should be exclusive? what is so wrong with saying that some riders should not ride certain trails if they do not have the requisite skills? i agree it's important to better serve the needs of the burgeoning ridership, but it's also important to be careful with what gets altered in the process.

i'e asked the question before but haven't received a direct answer; is there a master trail plan strategy for shore and/or each mountain? is there a plan that says these trails will be revamped to serve a certain riding segment and these will stay essentially the same? has a plan be created to create riding corridors so riders can get all the way down the mtn without having to ride something above their skill level? flow should exist throughout an entire trail network, not just on individual trails.

why is it such a bad thing to suggest that some trails should be exclusive? what is so wrong with saying that some riders should not ride certain trails if they do not have the requisite skills? i agree it's important to better serve the needs of the burgeoning ridership, but it's also important to be careful with what gets altered in the process.

This^

What is so wrong with having to work at and skill yourself up to riding certain trails, it was part of what I originally loved about mountain biking!

what is so wrong with saying that some riders should not ride certain trails if they do not have the requisite skills?

well, nothing

but what is so wrong with relegating that statement to a feature, rather than an entire trail, which the ridearound on dale effectively does?

well, nothing

but what is so wrong with relegating that statement to a feature, rather than an entire trail, which the ridearound on dale effectively does?

because the resulting increase in traffic from less skilled riders tends to destroy other parts of the trail.

ps - did you get that pm about the job i sent your way? maybe you know someone who would be a good fit for it?

what's next? participation ribbons for succesfully shuttling the old buck trail?

Which is exactly what has happened to Dale's

i'e asked the question before but haven't received a direct answer; is there a master trail plan strategy for shore and/or each mountain? is there a plan that says these trails will be revamped to serve a certain riding segment and these will stay essentially the same? has a plan be created to create riding corridors so riders can get all the way down the mtn without having to ride something above their skill level? flow should exist throughout an entire trail network, not just on individual trails.

No. Unless you count the Fromme Mountain Trail Classification Plan as a master plan, which it really isn't. It's more of an inventory that provides some best practices and recommendations.

I posted this in a previous thread.

A master trail strategy is a huge undertaking. It would probably take 2 years if the public consultation was done properly. I've always wanted to put some more cohesive thoughts down toward a trail strategy . . . anyone else interested? I have more spare time for "special projects" now that I'm semi-retired.

because the resulting increase in traffic from less skilled riders tends to destroy other parts of the trail.

this could degrade into a circular argument: more people ride the trail, and it starts getting ragged, but they come out to fix it, which opens it up to more riders, which beats it up…

would you concede the rock line is out of keeping with the rest of the (current) character of the trail? if those less skilled riders are riding (and destroying) most of the trail but walking that line, haven't we already hit your doomsday scenario, with or without the ride-around? who's to say it will inspire more less skiller riders to ride dales? sounds like its currently being appreciated by those who are already doing so…

ps - did you get that pm about the job i sent your way? maybe you know someone who would be a good fit for it?

i did, thanks for that. sounds (kinda) fun, but i've been there/done that and i'm well past working for $15/hour. anyway, i think/hope this is just a formal process to (finally) pay george for some of his hard and great work

No. Unless you count the Fromme Mountain Trail Classification Plan as a master plan, which it really isn't. It's more of an inventory that provides some best practices and recommendations.

I posted this in a previous thread.

A master trail strategy is a huge undertaking. It would probably take 2 years if the public consultation was done properly. I've always wanted to put some more cohesive thoughts down toward a trail strategy . . . anyone else interested? I have more spare time for "special projects" now that I'm semi-retired.

no, i don't count the fromme thing as master plan. i say master plan primarily from the point of trailwork, but should include many other things. i agree that it is a large undertaking, but i also think that a framework to at least start from could be hammered out in a afternoon with the right input. having some general idea of how the entire system should look would greatly help the direction of the work on the ground as it allows resources to be distributed effectively so backtracking doesn't need to be done in the future.

i'm digging again sat, it would make for an interesting trail work conversation.

this could degrade into a circular argument: more people ride the trail, and it starts getting ragged, but they come out to fix it, which opens it up to more riders, which beats it up…

it's already there…

would you concede the rock line is out of keeping with the rest of the (current) character of the trail? if those less skilled riders are riding (and destroying) most of the trail but walking that line, haven't we already hit your doomsday scenario, with or without the ride-around? who's to say it will inspire more less skiller riders to ride dales? sounds like its currently being appreciated by those who are already doing so…

yes, but it didn't use to be like that.
and it's about more than just the ride-around which is actually the whole point of the debate!

i did, thanks for that. sounds (kinda) fun, but i've been there/done that and i'm well past working for $15/hour. anyway, i think/hope this is just a formal process to (finally) pay george for some of his hard and great work

i kinda figured that but thought you would be better connected to some people who might want to take it on. would start at closer to $17 though and be a good in to the city to work in public rec if someone wanted that.