Public Meeting

Binder · Oct 24, 2009

crash said:
You are assuming the consultant won't take user input. My guess is they will.

I didn't assume anything, I asked a question.
You shouldn't guess if your trying to get accurate info out to the people.

Pook · Oct 25, 2009

I have a hard time trusting any government official...

I sure hope this all works out for you guys.

Travis1 · Oct 25, 2009

Binder said:
I didn't assume anything, I asked a question.
You shouldn't guess if your trying to get accurate info out to the people.

Yup. Until that consultant gets hired and starts working, you really don't know what the game plan will be.

nowires · Oct 25, 2009

So let me explain this a little more. Lets say on this multi use thought
So if we could get 20 miles of multi use trail in where we are all using the same trail and then 15 miles of 4x4 trails along with 20 miles of bike trails would this work for the area
So that would give 35 miles of trails for the 4x4s
40 miles for the bikes and quads
And can someone please answer a question for me. How many miles of trail are we loosing with the new concept excluding Izzy and BYS

nowires · Oct 25, 2009

Binder said:
So did the DNR change their position since Thursday night? Where did you get your information? Last I heard the DNR was going to hire a consultant for this and I find it hard to believe this has changed.

Let's reverse this. What are you doing to help with this?
Please explain what you are doing

crash2 · Oct 25, 2009

nowires said:
So let me explain this a little more. Lets say on this multi use thought
So if we could get 20 miles of multi use trail in where we are all using the same trail and then 15 miles of 4x4 trails along with 20 miles of bike trails would this work for the area
So that would give 35 miles of trails for the 4x4s
40 miles for the bikes and quads
And can someone please answer a question for me. How many miles of trail are we loosing with the new concept excluding Izzy and BYS

I can't see this working really. From what I am gathering the single track guys won't like this and in reality they need more miles than we do. I can see there point of view from listening to them because who would want to ride a trail thats our width? It would be like us running trails that are 2 lanes.

crash2 · Oct 25, 2009

Travis said:
Yup. Until that consultant gets hired and starts working, you really don't know what the game plan will be.

We still have a ton of work prior to a consultant even coming on board.

japerry · Oct 25, 2009

all good stuff. But I still want to know how we can fight the immunity law. I just rode Walker today, and if Reiter is going to be reviewed by the same folks as Walker (very likely), trails will have to pass the 32" Open/Open lowest common denominator.

We need to be focusing our efforts there. DNR would do whatever we wanted if the laws allowed them to. There is little point in blaming DNR for where we are at.

Its easy to blame them, but recent evidence has shown DNR taking a new approach to ORV recreation. I think we should give them a chance.

The_Shocker · Oct 25, 2009

japerry said:
all good stuff. But I still want to know how we can fight the immunity law. I just rode Walker today, and if Reiter is going to be reviewed by the same folks as Walker (very likely), it will have to pass the 32" Open/Open requirement.

We need to be focusing our efforts there. DNR would do whatever we wanted if the laws allowed them to. There is little point in blaming DNR for where we are at.

Its easy to blame them, but recent evidence has shown DNR taking a new approach to ORV recreation. I think we should give them a chance.

What is the 32" open requirement? And is it even possible to get that law changed before next year?

zukkev · Oct 25, 2009

japerry said:
all good stuff. But I still want to know how we can fight the immunity law. I just rode Walker today, and if Reiter is going to be reviewed by the same folks as Walker (very likely), it will have to pass the 32" Open/Open requirement.

We need to be focusing our efforts there. DNR would do whatever we wanted if the laws allowed them to. There is little point in blaming DNR for where we are at.

Its easy to blame them, but recent evidence has shown DNR taking a new approach to ORV recreation. I think we should give them a chance.

There is no actual ' 32" open/open requirement" Neil; It was a term locally used to guage the actual difficulty of some work we've been doing up there...again, there is no written 32" open/open thingamablob... In fact, there is some trail where there are 2 lines, one easier (for the 32" open/open thing), and a harder line, where my understanding is it is harder, how much? I don't know 1st hand...I was planning on heading up there today (sun), but things got in the way...:booo:
Anyhow, I do agree that the recreational immunity law needs to be revisited/amended....

nowires · Oct 25, 2009

Binder said:
So did the DNR change their position since Thursday night? Where did you get your information? Last I heard the DNR was going to hire a consultant for this and I find it hard to believe this has changed.

They are still going to hire a consaltant but if we all work together then I think it would go a long ways with DNR showing that the clubs want it

nowires · Oct 25, 2009

crash said:
I can't see this working really. From what I am gathering the single track guys won't like this and in reality they need more miles than we do. I can see there point of view from listening to them because who would want to ride a trail thats our width? It would be like us running trails that are 2 lanes.

The 20 miles of trail multi use trail is already in place. Everyone already is using them and getting along.
View attachment 36643

Cascade_Crawler · Oct 25, 2009

nowires said:
The 20 miles of trail multi use trail is already in place. Everyone already is using them and getting along.
View attachment 36643

are you the consultant?

nowires · Oct 25, 2009

Cascade_Crawler said:
are you the consultant?

Trying to bid on it
I have been working on a trail plan for the last 6 months. talking with DNR about what they want to see in the trail system as far as trail design and trail criterias. Yes I have came up with a trail design that meets all there current criterias. I will not post my trail design do to the bidding prosess

But my whole objective is to get user input when trails are being made as to final path

I will give out as much info as I can without compramising my bid pac

I will also try to direct the ORV users in a way that will help the prosess move along smoother as I hear things

zukkev · Oct 25, 2009

nowires said:
Trying to bid on it
I have been working on a trail plan for the last 6 months. talking with DNR about what they want to see in the trail system as far as trail design and trail criterias. Yes I have came up with a trail design that meets all there current criterias. I will not post my trail design do to the bidding prosess

But my whole objective is to get user input when trails are being made as to final path

I will give out as much info as I can without compramising my bid pac

I will also try to direct the ORV users in a way that will help the prosess move along smoother as I hear things

Very

!!! Hope you get it Mr.!!!

Binder · Oct 25, 2009

nowires said:
Let's reverse this. What are you doing to help with this?
Please explain what you are doing

Nothing..I've told you this before so why do you keep asking?

Binder · Oct 25, 2009

nowires said:
Trying to bid on it
I have been working on a trail plan for the last 6 months. talking with DNR about what they want to see in the trail system as far as trail design and trail criterias............
I will give out as much info as I can without compramising my bid pac.............

Who in the DNR have you been working with for the last 6 months?