Money Mark
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 563
That's Nothing New.
-
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
Walker, Ron's Run Re-route....
- Thread starter Money Mark
- Start date
- Status
That's Nothing New.
japerry
Well-Known Member
If this is the case then the DNR is just being stupid. Even then the "log line" is supposed to be an easy line. If bikes can't do it them adjust the line so they can.......
Having bypasses around bypasses just teaches everyone that bypasses are OK. Next thing you know it will be Reiter pit #2.
The log line was supposed to be easier than the rock. But in reality we found that the rock was too small to be useful at the moment, and the logs became undercut into a decent obstacle.
Therefore, we need to make a good route around the other side of the rock -- which should have been done in the first place. To me this whole thing is a 'bug fix'. its a simple thing and shouldn't be blown out of proportion. If we had just done it when we were there none of this discussion would be happening now.
Maverick26
As iron sharpens iron...
I didnt think the trail was that hard a few weeks ago when I was out there. If you wheel a rig that may get stuck (thats everyone) then dont get pissed about pulling some rope. If you are not stuck but are waiting for some one else to pull rope then chill out, have a smoke, take a piss... your wheelin man!
That said, I think by-passes are great in some areas, some are created for different reasons but are well needed in most cases. I think by-passes should be regulated by the user group not the DNR. If the trail ends up like sac-up then its out of hand. It should be trail and by-pass, not trail and 20 by-passes.
I think most all of our trials should have a 20-40 foot damage buffer on each side of them... that way if a by-pass is made... GREAT!!
That said, I think by-passes are great in some areas, some are created for different reasons but are well needed in most cases. I think by-passes should be regulated by the user group not the DNR. If the trail ends up like sac-up then its out of hand. It should be trail and by-pass, not trail and 20 by-passes.
I think most all of our trials should have a 20-40 foot damage buffer on each side of them... that way if a by-pass is made... GREAT!!
Binder
Well-Known Member
Sack up was regulated by the users.:;
Money Mark
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 563
There's my guy.
Yep, your comparison analogy is dead on.There will have to be stronger "regulatory affairs" with the volunteer group leaders to ensure past mistakes are not repeated.
Maverick26
As iron sharpens iron...
As it should be Rick. But when it gets out of hand like sac-up did then it should be fixed. Like I said... Why the need for 20 by passes?
Thanks Mark... I think we are on the same page??
Thanks Mark... I think we are on the same page??
When you have an unregulated area - who is one group to say to another what is and is not the right way to use it.
I've seen a LOT of double standards over the years, not only between user groups, but within them. Seems everyone thinks their way is the right way and no side cares to compromise.
Duck Dodgers
Well-Known Member
:haha::haha::haha::haha: No wonder the Greenies are Kicking our ass. Listen to all of you. Ya'll whine and bitch at each other like a bunch of adolescent school girls. There's good ideas and bad ideas here. But the testosterone is trumping gray matter here. Binder, Money, Kev... ya'll have some good ideas. Maybe it's time to bring it all together, discuss it "offline" in a meeting of the most informed and active users and see where that takes us. The "letting it ride" position Money may not be a half bad idea. It's at least worth looking at. All I see is our community of users struggling and begging for crumbs while they make us pay for the whole pie. Maybe it is time for a major shift in approach. (no pun intended)
Jakob, you've pissed so many people off all around you your credibility is shot. We all like hard stuff to play on. Granted my rig is not the best equipped for the most technical stuff. But I don't do to bad. What you need to realize is that not everyone has the 25k+ to shell out for an already built rig like you did. Some people actually build their rigs a little at a time as they can afford it. A little humility would do you some good.
Jakob, you've pissed so many people off all around you your credibility is shot. We all like hard stuff to play on. Granted my rig is not the best equipped for the most technical stuff. But I don't do to bad. What you need to realize is that not everyone has the 25k+ to shell out for an already built rig like you did. Some people actually build their rigs a little at a time as they can afford it. A little humility would do you some good.
KarlVP
Love that TOYOTA
Tellcio ORV park in Murphy, North Carolina had a pleasant solution.
They actually named the trail "Guardrail" after the blockage. Some wheelers took an old guardrail and nailed/bolted it to a few trees.
Nowadays it is a few old winch cables strung across the trees.
This seems to work very well.
They actually named the trail "Guardrail" after the blockage. Some wheelers took an old guardrail and nailed/bolted it to a few trees.
Nowadays it is a few old winch cables strung across the trees.
This seems to work very well.
Money Mark
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 563
I wish that was possible; to meet face to face. I suppose these ongoing threads are, in lieu of, that for me.
Ducky......you have "the pulse" of wheelers. I can hear it in your words. The RRR's will be at the forefront of change, if it is to happen.
I can't recall any time the DNR has even hinted at us being allowed to run cable around a tree, or attach anything of substance to a live tree.
About the most we can do is attach those little diamonds to them, and even then you are supposed to be using aluminum nails.
The problem is you have two major groups to contend with.
Those that have worked (especially in a leadership role) with the government and understand their rules for how "their" land is managed, as well as the politics involved.
And those that haven't. Those that haven't keep wanting to apply common sense to the situation, and then arguing about how common sense should prevail.
As for the problem area, if I was out there I'de do one of three things.
1) If the section has deteriorated to the point that the difficulty of it no longer matches the difficulty of the rest of the trail, I would consider filling the obstacle in some.
2) Cutting that log and leaving a go around, but would need to take a good look at the terrain to see if that go-around would just turn in to the same thing as it's trying to avoid.
3) If the obstacle somewhat matches the trail, then the gatekeeper may need some work to keep the shorter rigs out. I'de also put a winch anchor point in if non were readily available. Something to make recovery a lot quicker and easier to hopefully avoid the backups.
The problem is, it seems like most of the crowd now days has no clue, nor possibly care, for the term "tread lightly". Too many just try to muscle their way over something digging deeper holes. (At least forest service can and will cite you for this, even though it's subjective.) An approach of attempting a couple times and if you can't make it then, pull cable, is more in line with tread lightly. So, even if you give people a winch anchor point, the odds of most users using it soon enough is remote.
zukkev
Cornfuzzled yet again...
Unfortunately there are no trees to do anything like this....Tellcio ORV park in Murphy, North Carolina had a pleasant solution.
They actually named the trail "Guardrail" after the blockage. Some wheelers took an old guardrail and nailed/bolted it to a few trees.
Nowadays it is a few old winch cables strung across the trees.
This seems to work very well.
And this....But there are stumps around...problem is still the steel material...
We'll use stumps and downed trees. Sometimes if it's a problem area, aka people keep moving them, we'll cable them together with old crane cable.
We've also used (sometimes HUGE) tank traps, sunk trees vertically or sometimes pointing back at the 4x4 user, or basically anything else that comes to mind that would make someone say "fawk it, that's just too much work to undo".
unclestripey
Well-Known Member
Ducky---yer the man!:awesomework::awesomework::beer:
Binder
Well-Known Member
If you had read the thread you would know that the issue is quads and bikes.
Two issues here are first using the steel cable is a liability issue and a tank trap wouldn't work in this spot and is actually against DNR policy. Yes I know they still occasionally put in tank traps but their not supposed to.
Binder
Well-Known Member
So...given that this bypass is all about bikes and quads needing a go around then why do some people want a log cut back? Sounds to me like the bikes and quads are getting around it just fine. If the wheelers need a go around then tell them to use a winch.
I'm still not seeing the big deal here.
I'm still not seeing the big deal here.
I thought the issue was 4WD users being unable to make the obstacle for one reason or another and cutting a bypass through the swale. Which has been blocked (repeatedly?).
Cutting the log back was someone's suggestion to keep the 4WD users in the corridor but give them an "out".
Who said tank traps were against DNR policy? (I'm looking for a citeable source, not a DNR person's word.)
I ask, because I haven't heard this, not that we use them very often anymore due to other reasons.
crash2
-Oh no I picked a side-
- Status
