Along with Shar I've built a few trails and maintain more.  If someone wants to help that's great. But a lot of the work I do is spur of the moment so not much warning. Some of the work is mid ride as tools are cached close by (note to other builders in Seymour - hide your stuff well - I had a pack and buckets/sieve pinched).

A lot of times I just pound away at trailwork as a change from a deskjob.  It's cool to build something tangible or maintain an already nice line as opposed to making paper.   While it's nice if people help I don't give much advance warning because I don't know myself.    Long story short - just go donate to a local trail org.  Or what Jerry said.  Because Jerry is right

I'm with Jerry

You know when you said you weren't a journalist? You were right. You gave Sam an easy out and didnt press him on tough questions.

I'd say you weren't doing your job except you admitted you weren't committed to doing it.

Would you like to continue this further? Write another article about a controversial topic and get defensive when people ask you questions. That seems to work really well

No. I was asking you a question. You provided an answer in this article.

You're writing an article about a sensitive topic and saying its lame for people to ask you questions? Think about what you just said.

OK - edit - "Many Pinkbike comments were on point.

Sloppy language on my part. Some manufacturers make the argument that pedelecs are merely pedal assisted mountain bikes on the basis that they are merely pedal assisted and have no throttle. Accordingly that pedelecs should be treated as mountain bikes. The manufacturers making this argument are those who are making pedelecs

The US Wilderness Act and regs mechanized vs non mechanized distinction is particular to the US and does allow legal sleight of hand to equate pedelecs to mountain bikes. Canada's motorized vs non-motorized distinction. Speaking for myself I could not argue as an advocate that pedelecs are non-motorized - at least not with a straight face

Now if you in your personal capacity or your employer can see an argument for pedelecs to be treated as non motorized and therefore as mountain bikes you are more than welcome to volunteer to take on that task. But its YOUR task to undertake. Is that fair?

When the time comes and if people who start using e-bikes start advocating for them that will be a good thing. And if organically trail systems evolve to accommodate different trail use patterns caused by ebike use that would be a good thing too. Its my sincere hope that people who want ebikes will step up and take care of things on the advocacy end. But my experience is that this won't happen and that ebike issues get offloaded onto mtb advocates. Hopefully I will be proven wrong.

I completely agree with the statement in your last sentence.

And I'm telling you right now - when there aren't a lot of e-bikes around, that approach is what the trail orgs have taken. But you'd have to be blind to not see that there will be more e-bikes (industry is pushing them hard). So the trail advocates "not my problem" position is changing. Because, like it or not, it will be the trail advocates' problem..

I've not spent time much biking in Mexico and then only in Baja. I would like to go to Oaxaca but haven't gotten to it yet so excuse me if I'm assuming too much. The Mexicans I've met riding tell me that there aren't that many bikes on most trail areas and there isn't that much trail conflict. So if that's the case I can definitely see your point of view.

I don't know about the erosion effects not having ridden them long enough and having no experience in a heavily e-biked area. Having ridden a pedelec, a Bionicon, a Lev (and some other brand I can't recall) I know e-bikes will mean trails get ridden in a different way. Is it a better way or would it cause issues? I don't know - that's way too specific to a trail system. I suspect the speed difference climbing will cause issues because of human nature; closing speeds between climbers and descenders (or hikers/bikers) on traditional two way trails will increase and some people using e-bikes will be assholes and will buzz others. I agree that's not a problem unique to ebikes but generic to humans.

My concern is that the LMs and other trail groups will have negative perceptions to ebikes - lumping them in with motorized. And that this negative perception will spill over to mountain bikes.

Anyone else think that Mark Wood's contributions to the Shore should be recognized in a formal way? Community award, plaque somewhere on the shore? It seems to me that he's done mostly good stuff for the mtb community.

Add Peter Morin to the mix. A VOLUNTEER FOR DECADES. Ran into Peter and Rob M doing trailwork on the Singing Pass in Whistler. He's selflessly put thousands of hours into trails, the vast majority without pay.

I'd add Digger to that mix too but Sharon and Wade and Rocky put up a plaque and a bench for him at the Ladies' trailhead already. Also thousands of hours of volunteer trailwork over decades

Ewan asked me to post this on this behalf as he is very relaxed post Christmas beers

Ewan feels very honoured by the nomination by his good friend TheDon and the good knowledgeable non-judgmental kind people at NSMB. However he wishes to remind his fanclub that it is ski season and lots of time during the rest of the year to put up trailwork pictures. He feels it is time for him to shred hundred of meters of virgin pow with his friends the CMHC Rogue Crew and of course THE Asian Adonis. And he sez "I have a real job now"

dalbello #intuitionliners #cantfeelmyfeet #powinmyface #loraxbesttrailever #tecnicablizzard #skibc #visitpemberton #touringbootsgofundme

I could see how you could get lost in that zone. Try to explain to someone from out of town how to get from Hyannis to GSM! I wonder what some solid signage would cost? Maybe even some cheap plastic one 10 ft into trail heads to curb confusion at intersections. Maybe CMHC would pay for it? GoFundMe for signage? Or just leave it..Meh. Trailforks works pretty great for most of us I guess

It needs better signage. Talking to RSTBC about it

Did the NSMBA build all the trails on CMHC land? I don't think that they did. Do many (but not all) 'rogue' builders build trails, then just leave them to erode and rot away while they move on to the next trail? Maybe…. I know LL does shed loads of trail maintenance, but I still don't understand the need for taking pot shots at the NSMBA over taking over the maintenance of largely abandoned trails. .

Tom is right. I was referring mainly to new trails. Of which the NSMBA is by far the main builder.

You also miss the point again. In my opinion, all trailwork is good trailwork whether by the official trail body or independents. My criticism is not the NSMBA's trailwork in the CMHC or any of their sanctioned work My criticism is over the NSMBA's "you're with us against or against us" mentality seen in the NSMBA's DNA and which led them to be so hostile to independent trailwork in the CMHC while simultaneously doing the bulk of CMHC trailwork. This meant they could never have a coherent story for doing work in the CMHC without it sounding like a house of cards.

Other local area organizations (SORCA, WORCA, FVMBA, PVTA) have independent builders. None of them carry out unsanctioned trailwork. None of them are so similarly hostile to independent builders.

Moving on and moving forward. It's pretty clear (massive) mistakes were made in relation to CMHC trailwork by the sanctioned North Shore trail organization. Coun. Mathew Bond and the DNV did 99% of the work in clearing up these mistakes. How to avoid those mistakes in the future? IMO a big first step would involve recognizing what mistakes were made. And IMO communication with independents would be a good start. And also IMO adopting ethically defensible positions would be another good start.

i am personally hopeful that the new board can guide staff and the organization to recognize that mistakes were made. At the same time I am hopeful that the new board can move away from the toxic "us against them" mentality and learn from Pemberton, Squamish, Fraser Valley and Whistler as to how to work with independents

I just would like to know why an organization states they work with the landowners when it appears that they do not.

So who exactly is making these decisions to build new trails? Is it rogue builders?

A worthwhile question to ask at the Town Hall.

Especially in the context of NSMBA 101 presented by Vince (which you pointed out) see https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BybBpJdymDJvOUJHQlFfWTVUeWs/view - some excerpts

At this time the CMHC is not an engaged land manager and as a result there is
no policy on mountain bike trails on their land. There is currently no official
permitting for trail building on CMHC land either. The NSMBA does not have any
direct contact with the CMHC.

The NSMBA advocates against the constructions of trails or features which have
not been authorized or permitted by the land managers.

The context of this discussion was the 2014 Townhall when Vince initially presented NSMBA 101. The NSMBA 101 document initial draft was very strong in condemning any work they deemed to be "rogue" and unsanctioned - in particular any work being carried out in the CMHC. When I pointed out to Vince that the NSMBA was by far the largest builder in the CMHC and that they had been actively working on trails in the CMHC since the 2010s, the NSMBA then made edits to NSMBA 101 document to the effect that the NSMBA's negative stance towards rogue and unsanctioned trails were only in the context of lands where "Trails or features built … [where] the NSMBA has a formal work agreement with a Land Manager.

It was never explained or made clear to me why a trail organization purporting to work only on trails in a sanctioned setting and with the OK of a land manager could justify working in the CMHC without permission, yet also condemn independent builders for also working in the CMHC without permission.

Perhaps if you ask the NSMBA this question you can get an answer.

Imo let the posts stay. Let people incriminate themselves. Let them state lies or say stupid things.

For example I was disappointed when stalker dubprof falsely accused Sharon of cutting trees on Dreamweaver and the thread got deleted. Imo that thread should have stayed

For the sake of being complete here is a post by someone logged in as Hazen Colbert on the North Shore News.

Link is here

http://www.nsnews.com/news/breaking-cmhc-reverses-north-vancouver-trail-ban-1.2385391

Hazen Colbert North Vancouver
20 hours ago

"I will be meeting with the NSMBA and its legal counsel in November to discuss, among other things, respectful and reasonable trail use by mountain bikers. I will ask the NSMBA to abide by International Mountain Bike Association guidelines that all bike trails be signed and one-way, and that bikers dismount when approaching hikers and equestrians.. I will request the NSMBA, who receive $100,0000 a year from the DNV with no requirement they account for how the money is spent, respect the DNV's anti-bullying policy or their grant will be at risk I will also raise with DNV Council a requirement that all mountain bike trail users require a permit with a nominal fee, and that irresponsible behaviour including irresponsible riding and unauthorized trail and structure building result in revocation of the permit and a ban on access to what are public lands as is the case elsewhere. Trails are for all including hikers, runners and dog walkers, stakeholders who have a right to safety on public land."

Credit goes to the DNV and Councillor Bond for the heavy lifting on the CMHC issues. Please note this not over yet as details of how the CMHC and RSTBC will collaborate with all users has not been ironed out yet. Please also note that the CMHC and RSTBC statememt did not address organized or commercial events. Therefore the status of trail running clinjcs, the Kneeknacker, BCBR, Fivers or organized trail days is still indeterminate.

Echo hecklers question.

Will there be an opportunity beforehand to ask questions of directors and candidates?

Who's returning as directors? Couldn't see a reference to the two year termers. Apologies if I missed it.

There's some minor typos on the 2016 agenda btw. Just some date references in the PDF to 2014-5. Should be 2015-6

Donated! From Shar and Lee