Cambodia decommissioned

The NSMBA has no say in this? We are all just supposed to accept that a good advanced fun ride has just been mothballed?

… is that how it works?

The NSMBA has no say in this?

Certainly not.

The NSMBA has no say in this? We are all just supposed to accept that a good advanced fun ride has just been mothballed?

… is that how it works?

pretty much.

or we can all show up at the metro offices with pitchforks.

I hiked up as far as the double drop today, all the structures have been cut down and scattered in the woods and all of the earthworks have had the large logs and rocks removed. Completely unrideable.

The fact is, is that if these type of trails don't exist, people are going to go out and build them. How many people that ride Seymour now are going to look at their options(or lack thereof) and decide to try and cut a new line in?

It was obviously a knee jerk reaction, but It just seems a little short sighted on Metro Van's part.

What a Joke, off to Squamish I go more and more

I too was gutted when I heard the terrible news that Cambodia had been torn up. One of the shores best! No one ran into Pipeline with a chainsaw a couple years back when that poor guy lost his life doing what he loved. Bit of a double standard if in fact Cambodia was torn out due to the latest injury. I was lead to believe the NSMBA was working to have it sanctioned, which makes the decommissioning that much worse. I'm afraid I agree with Bradical…………. Squamish isn't too far away.

I was lead to believe the NSMBA was working to have it sanctioned, which makes the decommissioning that much worse.

From the NSMBA town hall minutes (Seymour Update):

"CBC [HTML_REMOVED] Cambodia: NSMBA submitted plans to Metro for both, not permitted to work on either"

Metro at first seemed willing to work with us; we did a walk through to begin planning the needed trail work (water management was a priority). Metro then changed their mind, and we were not permitted to work on it after all.

Minutes here: https://drive.google.com/a/nsmba.ca/file/d/0BybBpJdymDJvZ053dk1lVXFPYnM/view

Contact for Metro: [email protected]

Cheers,
Penny

From the NSMBA town hall minutes (Seymour Update):

"CBC [HTML_REMOVED] Cambodia: NSMBA submitted plans to Metro for both, not permitted to work on either"

Metro at first seemed willing to work with us; we did a walk through to begin planning the needed trail work (water management was a priority). Metro then changed their mind, and we were not permitted to work on it after all.

Minutes here: https://drive.google.com/a/nsmba.ca/file/d/0BybBpJdymDJvZ053dk1lVXFPYnM/view

Contact for Metro: [email protected]

Cheers,
Penny

Thanks Penny. When contacting LSCR, is there anything that would be especially helpful to mention, and anything that would be counter-productive? Like many of us, I want to help but don't have a full sense of the politics and wouldn't want to make things worse. A strong partnership with LSCR is key given how many trails are in their management area.

No but intersections do get lights or reconfigured like the south end of the Burrard Bridge because accidents occur too frequently.

Maybe they didn't really know the nature of the trail and inspected it after the accident and some one got all concerned and had it removed. Who knows.

That is the disturbing part. "Who knows." There does not seem to be any accountability or realistic reasons or notice being made available to the mtb community. Just the seemingly final, decomm of the trail and a fantastic trail at that.

I was not able to ride all the lines, but didn't care, walked down or around those not in my wheelhouse, enjoyed the trail just the same.

To take the analogy further, if there were issues with certain parts of the trail, then perhaps look to change up / reroute that part, but leave the trail open.

A strong partnership with LSCR is key given how many trails are in their management area.

Metro Van has clearly shown they aren't interested in partnership. To actually consult and take input from the community? Not in their mandate.

It's starting to look pretty clear what the future of the LSCR will look like. Well, at least we still have Fromme.

Another question - based on this map, what business did LSCR have decommissioning the full length of Gnomer?

Another question - based on this map, what business did LSCR have decommissioning the full length of Gnomer?

The same as they had when they decommissioned the rock face on Lower Dales. None.

Another question - based on this map, what business did LSCR have decommissioning the full length of Gnomer?

When can we buy the lots that are marked out on Pangor and other trails. I want to buy the lot on Pangor that has the rock roll. I promise to keep it open.

I sent comments to LSCR and I encourage everyone to do the same. Who knows what difference it will make, but feedback and dialogue is good.

My main talking points were:

- to ask for the reasons for Cambodia's decommissioning
- to suggest that Cambodia was a few small drainage upgrades from being considered highly sustainable
- to suggest that riders assume risk when they choose to ride a double black trail, and that LSCR could have mitigated their risk with signage
- to indicate that I do not support public funds being spent on decommissioning Cambodia
- to ask how managing trails on CMHC land fits with LSCR's mandate